Minutes - Council - 06/27/2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

City Attorney Goodrich asked if Councilmember Elvig would like approval to be subject to any type of review. Councilmember Elvig replied he would not like the approval to be subject to a review, but would like this information to be forwarded to the Council. Motion by Councilmember EIvig, seconded by Councilmember Olson, to authorize a business subsidy agreement with Minnesota Waterjet, Inc., and to authorize execution of a development agreement with Minnesota Waterjet, Inc. contingent upon review by the City Attorney. Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Gamec, Councilmembers Elvig, Olson, Cook, Pearson, and Strommen. Voting No: None. Absent: Councilmember Jeffrey. Case #3: Request for Comprehensive Plan Amendment; Case of Thomas Peterson Community Development Director Trudgeon indicated Thomas Peterson has submitted an application for an amendment to the 2001 Comprehensive Plan. The request is to change the land use designation from Rural Developing to Places to Work on the property located on the east side of Jarvis Street directly north of the railroad tracks off of Highway 10. Mr. Peterson is proposing to develop the site with office condominiums, which would require a land use change from Low-Density Residential to Places to Work. If the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is approved, the site plan for the property will come forward to the City Council at a future meeting, along with a rezoning request. Mr. Trudgeon explained the subject property is bordered on the south and west by industrial parcels, one rural residential lot to the north, and Northfork golf course to the east. The property is bordered on the west by the City of Elk River in Sherburne County. Community Development Director Trudgeon stated on April 25, 2005, the City Council adopted an Interim Policy for proposed land use changes that are requested prior to the completion of the Comprehensive Plan update. The Staff Report goes through this analysis. Mr. Trudgeon advised the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the request at their June I, 2006 meeting. While there was general consensus in favor of changing the land use to Places to Work, some of the Commissioners were concerned about voting in favor of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment without taking action on a site plan and rezoning request at the same time. The Planning Commission voted to recommend denial of the request on this basis. Staff advised the applicant to proceed with the Comprehensive Plan amendment request based on his desire to hear from the Planning Commission and City Council on the land use change, prior to expending significant funds on a full site plan submittal. Because a formal recommendation was made, the City Council needs to make a final determination on the request. Staff would also note that Comprehensive Plan Amendments are less common with site plans than with subdivisions, where applicants have the benefit of sketch plan review to get an initial read from the Planning Commission and City Council. Mr. Trudgeon advised staff is recommending approval of the request for Comprehensive Plan Amendment based on staffs interpretation of the criteria listed in the Interim Policy, and the large amount of industrial property to the west and south of the parcel. If the Council is inclined to grant approval staff would propose holding off sending the amendment to the Metropolitan Council until the site plan and rezoning catch up to the rest of City Council / June 27, 2006 Page 7 of 24