Laserfiche WebLink
Councilmember Zimmerman replied no. He stated that they are talking about changing from one <br />land use to another and making sure that the land use as proposed will happen and if nOt the <br />rezoning goes back. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that he would not ignore the performance bond issue. He <br />stated that they should be taking in enough costs to revert the rezoning back if it becomes <br />necessary. He stated that he would like the opinion of the City Attorney regarding performance <br />bonds. <br /> <br />Councilmember Zimmerman stated that he felt that contract rezoning could be a plus for the <br />developer and the residents. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec expressed concern that if the public is not involved from the start then they would <br />probably be better off keeping the policy as is. <br /> <br />City Administrator Norman noted that he would have the City Attorney review the issue and <br />report back to the Council at a future meeting. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec requested that the City Attorney review the liability if the Council supports the <br />developer through the process and then chooses to deny the rezoning. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen noted that all approvals would be contingent upon the rezoning. <br /> <br />2) Andover Development Policy <br /> <br />City Administrator Norman stated that during the March 5, 2002 work session, the City Council <br />discussed a development policy implemented by the City of Andover in 1993, and revised six <br />different times through May 2000. The development policy was in the form of a guideline for an <br />annual housing improvement program. During. the March 5t~ discussion, it was pointed out that a <br />major difference between the City of Ramsey and the City of Andover was that housing <br />development projects are public projects while the City of Ramsey currently allows housing <br />developments to be handled Privately. He stated that the City constructing the public <br />improvements for housing developments was not a new concept. Up through 1993, the City was <br />the developer in housing projects. Having improvements for a housing project performed by the <br />City has always been, and continues to be an option, however, all development in recent years <br />has been privately constructed. The Council asked for a brief report of reconsidering the housing <br />development policy for discussion at a future Council work session. The following is a brief <br />discussion of advantages and disadvantages of a City performing the housing development: <br /> <br />Advantages <br />· Financing of housing projects could be reduced because the city has a more attractive interest <br /> rate and the combining of projects would allow for a less expensive financing for housing <br /> developments. <br />· Cost of the project would decrease due to the economy's scale of combining projects. <br /> <br />City CounciFMay 6, 2002 <br /> Page 6 of 18 <br /> <br /> <br />