Development Moratorium - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

• • PROPOSED MORATORIUM ORDINANCE By: Ryan R. Schroeder, City Administrator Background: T7-b� CASE # At the Council meeting of February 25, 1997, Council directed that staff prepare an ordinance, the passage of which would place a moratorium against future subdivision of residential property within the community. It followed that, during any resulting moratorium period, the City would complete its review of the comprehensive plan update initiated in December, 1993. Further, it is expected that additional components to the comprehensive plan, including chapters on housing and the environment, would be added to the study project. Enclosed for your review and consideration is that proposed ordinance. During discussion of the moratorium proposal and related issues, the question was asked as to the certainty of inclusion of land parcels within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). Enclosed for your review is the timeline of activities related to the most recent MUSA expansion. On November 4, 1993, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Comprehensive Plan amendment including a large portion of the community (including all of the proposed Apple Ridge Subdivision). The City Council, on November 9, 1993, authorized submittal of that plan amendment to the Metropolitan Council. On January 12, 1995, the Metropolitan Council approved a plan amendment and notified the City of such on January 17, 1995. The approval included the entire area of the proposed Apple Ridge Subdivision. We have also researched our files regarding required rezonings since 1984. It appears that the City's practice has been to consider residential property as defined by the district within which the property is found at the time of the development proposal (rural or MUSA). Rezonings have occurred if the development proposal was for a single family development but the underlying zoning was multi -family or commercial. Rezonings have also occurred on property that was outside the MUSA at the time of the development proposal. (In these cases, the rezoning request resulted in a subsequent MUSA expansion request as well.) At this point we are uncertain as to the impact of this past practice on future development proposals. Since late 1996, City Staff has been gathering information pertinent to City Council and Planning Commission review of proposed improvements to the housing and environmental elements of the Comprehensive Plan. We will soon be prepared, if so desired, to present some thoughts on issues such as these to Council (perhaps in a work session format). Further, Council has briefly discussed gaining funding and consultant assistance for the effort as well. The Metropolitan Council just released information on a grant/loan program configured to assist cities with required 1998 Comprehensive Plan updates. Their top geographic priority within this program is the third tier of suburbs (including Ramsey). Hence, it seems a funding source may be available for this effort. We have not formally contacted any consulting firms regarding proposed work plans or costs. At the last meeting, the motion directing the moratorium ordinance proposed excepting out subdivisions in progress. One development to which we had failed to alert Council is the townhouse development proposed at the intersection of C.R. #116 and C.R. #56 (Sunfish Pond), which has received preliminary plat review by the Planning Commission and which will be at the next Council meeting for approval. It is suggested that this development be added to the excepted list of any moratorium approval.