Minutes - Council - 08/22/2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

included in the MUSA and consist of the larger, rural lots ranging in size from 1 to 2.5 acres and are served by on-site well and septic. The current Comprehensive Plan targets this area for residential development with urban services. In accordance with City Code, a general development plan accompanied the application for rezoning. Although the general development plan is not in compliance with current performance standards, it does reflect the intent to develop the property with single family urban lots. Approval of the rezoning would be based on the Comprehensive Plan and the Applicant's intent to develop the property with single family residential lots. The platting process will review the proposal with respect to lot sizes, density, tree preservation, street layouts, grading and drainage plans, sewer/water/storm sewer plans, etc. The Planning Commission opened the public hearing on June 6, 2000. Several residents were present opposing the proposal because when they bought into Reilley Estates 1, 2 and 3, they were told the balance of the property would also be developed with one acre lots. Residents and Planning Commissioners also 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. The Planning Commission reconvened the public hearing at their regular meeting on July 10, 2000, and the City Attorney was present at the meeting. In response to a legal question raised, City Attorney Goodrich responded that the current comprehensive plan shows the subject property in the MUSA and State Statutes require cities to be in conformance with their comprehensive plans. Unless there are substantive, negative findings, the City should rezone the property to R-1 Urban Residential. The request was presented to the City Council on July 25, 2000. Councilmember Anderson was not present and at her request, the case was tabled until August 8, 2000, in order that she might participate in the discussion and action. On August 8, 2000, the City Council discussed the fact that this development proposal was the subject of a recent lawsuit which has been appealed by the developer. Council passed a motion to delay the decision on the request for rezoning until their regular meeting on August 22, 2000. The purpose of the delay was to provide the City Council an opportunity to meet with legal council representing the City in this legal matter. Motion by Councilmember Hendriksen, seconded by Councilmember Connolly, to introduce an ordinance rezoning certain property in Section 24 from R-1 Rural Residential to R-1 Urban Residential and to direct staff to prepare findings of fact. Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Gamec, Councilmembers Hendriksen, Connolly, Anderson, and Zimmerman. Voting No: None. Case #7: Consideration of Quit Claim of Remnant Parcel North of Riverdale Drive NW City Attorney Goodrich stated that this parcel receives its sewer and water access off of Riverdale Drive NW. However, this parcel has no direct access to Riverdale Drive NW and, therefore, the sewer and water that provides service to this lot is on property which is owned by the City of Ramsey. The triangular parcel was acquired when the right-of-way for Riverdale Drive NW was obtained. In order to clear up the title, the City has been asked to quit claim this City Council/August 22, 2000 Page 13 of 18