Laserfiche WebLink
Several communities in the Metropolitan Area are planning fOr the future <br />with a comprehensive plan that is at least five years old. For these <br />communities, zoning regulations, which are more frequently amended to keep <br />up with changes in developer interest and to reflect changes in community <br />goals, become more important and useful than broader land use policies. <br />Inconsistencies increase, and the comprehensive plan becomes more out-of- <br />date. To address this problem, communities are encouraged to periodically <br />undertake a broad-scale review of their comprehensive plans and to amend <br />them to reflect current city goals and policies. In the course of such a <br />review, a community may discover that the zoning ordinance also needs <br />updating. <br /> <br />While a comprehensive plan update may be necessary to reflect current <br />community goals and policies, it may also be required in response to <br />changes in Metropolitan Council policy plans or system statements (e.g. the <br />Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework, the transportation <br />policy plan or the sewers system statement). The MLPA requires local <br />governmental units, after receiving an amendment to a metropolitan system <br />plan, to review their comprehensive plans. The purpose of the review is to <br />determine if an amendment to the comprehensive plan is necessary to ensure <br />continued conformity with metropolitan system plans. This may be an <br />opportunity for the Council to require local units to either attest to the <br />consistency between their comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances or to <br />Justify an increase in system demand created by a zoning ordinance which is <br />inconsistent with the comprehensive plan. <br /> <br />..Impressing upon communities the importance of complyinE with the MLPA in <br />adoptin~ official controls not in conflict with the comprehensive plan. <br /> <br />A community should comply with the MLPA not simply because it is law, but <br />because the Council determines regional service allocations based on the <br />community's plan and on the assumption that zoning is consistent with the <br />plan. If a community allows, through its zoning ordinance, development at <br />a higher density than indicated in the comprehensive plan, it may be <br />allowing development that cannot be serviced by the regional systems, or <br />that conflicts with regional policies. If and when a project comes to the <br />Council for review, a delay may occur in project approval where this is the <br />case. Such a delay may cause the project itself to be delayed or even <br />abandoned. <br /> <br />Assistin$ communities in understandin~ what "in conflict with" means and in <br />preparin~ consistent plans and ordinances. <br /> <br />This is an ongoing process. The Council can play an educational role in <br />bringing to communities legal interpretations of "in conflict with" and <br />consistency as they have been used in other states. The Council most <br />likely will not have a direct role in preparing'consistent plans and <br />ordinances; only where achieving consistency impacts regional decisions <br />will there be a need for Council involvement. <br /> <br />,Reminding communities that the Metropolitan Council commits to providin~ <br />regional services only to serve the level of develo~nent indicated in a <br />comprehensive plan, even if the zoninE ordinance allows hiEher density <br />development or would require a higher service level. <br /> <br />12 <br /> <br /> <br />