Development Moratorium - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

• f Moratorium Extension May 11, 1998 Page 2 of 2 7. Hamilton/Holasek Property - This property is in the MUSA, is currently zoned commercial, and is not subject to the moratorium Owner says they have been approached by developers and they are contemplating selling. I also think that the developers approaching the owner want to do residential developments, at least that portion of the property between the river and Riverdale Drive. The Comprehensive Plan draft identifies this area as a commercial/environmental corridor. Believe it should be placed under the moratorium until the details of the environmental corridor and land use are better defined. 8. Miscellaneous Property East of Ramsey Blvd. - There are a couple of property owners involved here; the property is in the MUSA, is zoned Industrial, and as such is not subject to the moratorium. (There is an existing homestead on one of the lots). The comp plan draft projects a transitional edge in this vicinity. The development of the property with industrial uses could have an adverse impact on the plan for the area. This property should be brought into the moratorium. 9. Miscellaneous Property West of Ramsey Blvd. - This property is not in the MUSA, is zoned Industrial/Business Warehouse and is subject to the current moratorium. A town center and transitional edges are proposed in this vicinity in the comp plan draft. I know there is a Casey's store waiting to develop in the northeast corner of this property. This property should be retained in the moratorium. (the "Sites") In summary, the moratorium currently applies to the rezoning or subdivision of all residential land in the City and all business or industrial property outside the MUSA. As I review the Sites and compare them to what is proposed in the draft comprehensive plan, I have concluded that as we get closer to a final draft of the comp plan update, we can see that at all of the commercial/industrial Sites are subject to change under the new comp plan. It appears I have made a case for expanding rather than reducing the scope of the moratorium. However, we don't want to include all commercial/industrial property in the moratorium because we don't want to hinder the City's ongoing efforts in Business Park 95. And, the Hotel should be allowed to complete their development plan and split their parcel to create a lot for the restaurant. However, they currently are not subject to the moratorium so if they apply for a lot split prior to July, they should be allowed to follow through with the subdivision. Perhaps the simplest method is to include all property in the City in the moratorium, with the exception of the City's industrial park and then continue our policy of reviewing requests for exceptions on a casey by case basis. Remember this moratorium is only on the rezoning or subdividing of property. It does not prohibit the City from receiving and reviewing a site plan to develop an existing commercial/industrial lot of record.