Agenda - Planning Commission - 11/07/2002

Home

'next six months. P126 Letters were received from James Deal, NAU Country Insurance Company; Gregory Dolphin, Dolphin Real Estate Management, LLC; and David Hoeschen, Holiday Stationstores? Inc. opposing the moratorium. ' ".: Mayor Gamec stated that at this time they are unsure as to what is going to happen with the Highway #10 corridor. A plan is being considered that will relocate the highway to mn:along the railroad tracks and eventually the area will be opened up for freeway status. If that were-~to occur there will be no buildings on the north side of Highway #10 between the r~Llroad tracks and.the to,receive information from ~he highway. Because of all the things happening the City is waiting enwr0nmental ~m ac state before making any decisions regarding the corridor. There ~is:an study that is currently being completed for the proposed river ~bridge ~r°Ssing. The City is not sure when the changes are going to occur, but they do have to plan for it. The City does not want to make a lot of commitments to businesses until they know what is going to occur in the future.' The moratorium will provide for an opt out clause that will all'ow the Council to lift the moratorium on a piece of property if they feel it would be appropriate,- :It is his hope that after the first of the year they will have some direction, but for now the ~city needs some time to do · some plarm/ng. His personal opinion was to not let the moratorium;go over a six-month per/od. Councilmember Zimmemmn stated that as in T.H. #47 project that'.the .City of Ramsey helped the highway department rebuild the highway at a cost of 2.2 million dollars~ 'The total project cost was 6.46 million. MnDOT is more receptive to cities where the city '~ Willing to work with MnDOT. Highway #10 is becoming'very congested and it behooves them t,o work with MnDOT to come up with some long-term solutions. -- i',-_ Mayor Gamec stated that he hopes to be able to give the property owners some answers after the first part of the year. He stated that he would try and push th~ issue as fast as he can. Councilmember Kurak stated that she has concerns as to what the moratorium will do to those businesses that are looking at remodeling or upgrad~n~g their existing businesses. She inquired if business owners will be able to update their properties during the moratorium. Community Development Director Frolik stated that staff was looking for some direction from the Council as to what the scope of the moratorium would b~. She noted that there are several instances along Highway #10 where business owners are going to be doing pavement over the Councilmember Kurak inquired if the City starts making demands on the businesses along Highway #10-to up~ade their property and than place the property in a moratorium what legal issues is the City facing. City Attorney Goodrich reviewed State ordinance relating to moratoriums explaining that a moratorium can be put in place initially for a period of one year and can be extended for an ad&tional l:8 months in six month intervals. The City cannot stop development that has received prelim/nary approval prior to the effective date of the moratorium. Mr. Goodrich stated that the Council needs to decide what prohibitions they want to include. Typically the City has restricted rezoning and subdividing of property during a moratorium, but in this instance that may not be City Council]October 22, 2002 Page 6 of 35 I