Minutes - Planning Commission - 07/10/2000

Home

the Comprehensive Plan and the applicant's intent to develop the property with single family residential lots. The plat design including lot sizes, density, tree preservation, street layouts, grading and drainage plans, sewer/water/storm sewer plans, etc. are all subject to the current regulations for the R-1 Urban Residential District and Chapter 14 of the City Charter. The Planning Commission opened the public hearing on June 6, 2000. Residents and Planning Commissioners raised questions which required legal expertise. The Planning Commission continued the public hearing to July 10, 2000 and requested the City Attorney be present to address any legal issues. Once the Comprehensive Plan has been adopted or amended, cities must conform their land use regulations in accordance with the plan. The property has been in the MUSA since 1995 and staff recommended approval of rezoning the property from R-1 Rural Residential to R-1 Urban Residential. It was also noted that the moratorium on this property expired on May 12, 2000. Citizen Input Kerry Manuel, 15668 Juniper Ridge Drive NW, Ramsey, stated that he is part of a large group that was formed in the area to oppose the rezoning of the land. He explained that all the adjacent properties were developed into one acre lots and the residents were promised by the developer that the property in question would also be developed into one acre lots. Brent Smith, 15620 Yakima Street NW, Ramsey, stated that when the property was rezoned previously it was done against the advice of the attorney because a public hearing was not held by the City and the residents will do what they have to enforce the issue. Chairperson Anderson stated that the land in 1993 was not within the MUSA and the City Council made a request to include the property within the MUSA, which was approved in 1995 by the Met Council. He stated that it was his understanding that there was never a formal rezoning changing the property from R-1 Rural to R-1 Urban Residential. City Attorney Goodrich replied that that was correct. Chairperson Anderson inquired if the rezoning could be denied by the City since the property is included within the MUSA. City Attorney Goodrich replied that the City could deny the request, but would need to develop reasons for the denial and denial could be a difficult challenge in court to defend. He explained that the current Comprehensive Plan guides the property as urban residential and State Statue states that a City must be in conformance with their Comprehensive Plan. But if there is solid information that is brought out during the public hearing pertaining to issues such as utilities or traffic, there may be reason to deny the rezoning. Mr. Goodrich also noted that the City cannot deny the rezoning request on the basis that the entire neighborhood is against the rezoning. Chairperson Anderson stated that City Code requires that a concept plan be submitted with a rezoning application, which was done. But the concept plan does not conform to the City Planning Commission/July 10, 2000 Page 3 of 20