|
MotioJ~ c~,~'~'.~l '/t,tin!~ Yes: Mayor Gamec, Councilmembers Elvig, Strommen, Cook, Kurak,
<br />Pe~t~sol~, ~(1 /,i~'~rn~m. Voting No: None.
<br />
<br />Coul~tV lx;gi5t:~i. Jt~,~ l'or l~lat Review
<br />/kssJstant I't~[~iic; XVorl<s Director Olson stated the county is lobbying for legislation that would
<br />give thong, li~};~l [3i~;t ixzview for any project adjacent to or affecting a county road. Currently
<br />Dal<ot~ ('~,~,,., J,~; thc: only county that can do that, this legislation would grant this power to the
<br />~-cst o1' t.l~c r;t)~!l-~tit;, ~;tatcwide.
<br />
<br />Couneilm,;~l),;,' 3/i~n~nerman stated the intent of this legislation is concerning roads and public
<br />salcty.
<br />
<br />City /Xcln~.i~i:;i~'atc~' Nora]an replied as he reads the bill the county wants full plat approval
<br />authority. I I~' i~,licatecl he agrees the intent of this legislation is for public safety; however, it
<br />opens thin!,?-; ~l' i(> tiao.· county not agreeing with a City project.
<br />
<br />Counciln~:~l~;~' 5iro~nmen suggested the City's policy include language that states the City is
<br />SUl)porliw. o1' il-~e t:,t~l)lic safety provision, but opposes full plat approval authority for the county.
<br />
<br />Cotmeilm{:~d~c'.. l'.~'~tr'~ot~ stated he likes keeping local issues at the local level, and the City is just
<br />as t;onccrnc;i ;~t~{,,ti :;~l'(:iy as the county would be.
<br />
<br />Mellon b,,, ({>~t~ciln~cn~ber Elvig, seconded by Councilmember Cook, to adopt the City of
<br />Ramscy l~'~)iic;? l'(>-~itio~l for 2004 Legislative Session concerning the Eminent Domain Process,
<br />wi]ich wi l'~ 1,¢ i-,[~'~setl to state the City is supportive of the public safety provision, but opposes
<br />full plat al:,t-~ c,,:;tl ::~uthority for the county.
<br />
<br />Motion ca~-ricM '¥oting 'Yes: Mayor Gamec, Councilmembers Elvig, Cook, Kurak, Pearson,
<br />SlroJnn~cn. ;~r.(I ?:i~,n~qcrnmn, Voting No: None.
<br />
<br />Case #14:
<br />
<br />Approval of the Metropolitan Council Predevelopment Grant
<br />(Consent Agenda Item #7)
<br />
<br />Cout,cii~**c~b~,~ S ~,~n~nen noted the development guidelines state that master planning is not
<br />eligil)lc I~)t' |[-~t, ~,,l'~:~t fimding and she is curious how that was reconciled by the Met Council.
<br />Her second ,.it~,¢:;ti(~t~ i:q how this study fits into the City's strategic planning.
<br />
<br />Assistant ( ',',n ~',J~t,ity Development Director Trudgeon explained he is not sure how this fits into
<br />the big pit:l,~!'t; D!tt it is a step that will help them find those answers to the big picture.
<br />Spcc/15tzall¥ it,is~ ~..v~ll be done to take care of the obligation from the 2001 Comprehensive Plan in
<br />the l'ural r,:s,.~,,::; ~t~'ca. Il' this expands into other areas and other funds are used they can still
<br />accotnplisl~ ii~: C'il,/'s obligations in regards to the rural reserve area.
<br />
<br />City Council/February 24, 2004
<br /> Page 29 of 31
<br />
<br />
<br />
|