Laserfiche WebLink
Charter and questioned if the Commission were to approve the rezoning, would they be <br />committed to approving the concept plan. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich replied no. He suggested that the Planning Commission advise the <br />applicant if they approve the rezoning, that the approval of the rezoning does not approve the <br />concept plan and inform them of the defects. <br /> <br />Chairperson Anderson inquired if the concept plan complies with Chapter 14 of the City Charter. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich replied that he had not reviewed the concept plan, but Community <br />Development Director Frolik had indicated that it does not comply with Chapter 14 of the City <br />Charter. <br /> <br />Jack Miller, 4140 Terrace Lane, Minnetonka, stated that he is the applicant and was not present <br />at the previous Planning Commission meeting. He stated that he does not know how his <br />proposed development relates to the Comprehensive Plan, but knows the intent of the City was <br />that the Charter Amendments were not going to be the guiding light, but be included in the new <br />Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Miller reviewed the history of working with the City since 1970's. He <br />explained that from 1970 to 1985, when sewer first came in to the Rivers Bend development, <br />they were unable to get sewer out to the site in question. The City at that time also had a one <br />acre minimum lot size requirement, but virtually all the one acre lots are not true one acre lots <br />because they were measured from the middle of the street. When the lots in the second and third <br />addition were developed in Reilley Estates, the City policy was to encourage building homes on <br />half the lot so that when City utilities became available there would be an opportunity to <br />subdivide and sell the other half of the property. The majority of the homes are built on one side <br />of the lot and the lots are assigned with two street numbers. In 1995, the City began running out <br />of urban lots and petitioned to bring other land into the MUSA, which included this property. <br /> <br />Chairperson Anderson stated that the testimony the Commission has heard from the residents is <br />that 18 months ago there was an application for preliminary plat of the property that was <br />withdrawn. The residents state that they were presented a map when they built their homes <br />reflecting that the 75 acres would be platted into one acre plats and were assured that this is the <br />way it would be developed. Mr. Anderson stated he is not aware of any commitment that was <br />made to the City to develop the property into one acre lots. <br /> <br />Mr. Miller explained that in the 1970's when the property was platted, there was no vision for <br />City sewer and water so the property was originally planned to be sold at the minimum lot <br />requirement which was one acre lots; but there was never a guarantee or a legal promise for one <br />acre lots. He also noted that the majority of the adjacent property owners did not purchase their <br />property from him. <br /> <br />Chairperson Anderson inquired as to the lawsuit the applicant initiated against the City of <br />Ramsey that was dismissed and questioned the reasoning for the Courts decision. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/July 10, 2000 <br /> Page 4 of 20 <br /> <br /> <br />