Laserfiche WebLink
I TO: City Council <br /> FROM: City Staff <br /> <br /> I RE: Comprehensive Plan Submission Alternatives <br /> <br /> DATE: March 1, 1982 ~ <br /> <br /> As you are aware, the City's Comprehensive Plan must be accepted by the Metro- <br /> I politan Council prior to June 7, 1982. In order to meet this date, the plan and <br /> any revisions must be submitted to the Met Council staff by April 15, 1982. The <br /> purpose of this memo is to outline to the Council your alternatives in meeting <br />I the above date requirements. <br /> <br /> 1). Submit plan showing 2% acre density outside 1990 Urban Area and construct <br /> ~. second connection with City funds. . <br />I 2) Submit plan with one per 10 acre density and request second connection <br /> pursuant to the attached resolution. <br /> <br />! <br /> All of the above alternatives require a reduction of the Urban Area to two square <br /> miles which is approximately 1,080 acres, which should be an adequate Urban Area. <br /> <br />! <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Dropping the request for the second connection may be acceptable, but we need <br />further confirmation on this from the Met Council. Until we have definite un- <br />qualified information on this, we recommend continuing with the second connection <br />request. Jim Barton will be getting us the information in this area. <br /> <br />Failure to have the plan submitted to the Metropolitan Council Staff on April 15th <br />will cause our present plan to be processed by the Met Council. They will tell us <br />officially to get into conformance, give us nine months to do so if we have not, <br />they will then seek court action. <br /> <br />With regards to the "interceptor" going east to Highway ~47 and serving only Dun- <br />ham Oaks, we have been advised to not take any strong action on this subject at <br />this particular time. We should let Waste Control and the Met Council know that <br />we question the appropriateness of this as an interceptor, however, anything stronger <br />should wait until the lower segment of'~the CAB gets underway. This was just passed <br />in the last couple of weeks amid some opposition. We feel it best to let this get <br />settled down, perhaps until bonds are sold until we take further action. <br /> <br />Please see attached resolution requesting Waste Control to relocate to the west <br />the connection point for Ramsey's second connection. It looks possible for this <br />to be accomplished. <br /> <br />/po <br /> <br /> <br />