Minutes - Planning Commission - 12/03/1998 - Special Meeting

Home

Case #2: Request to Rezone Certain Property from R-1 Rural Residential to R-1 Urban Residential; Case of Reilley Estates Partnership and Arcon Development, Inc. Zoning Administrator Frolik stated that Reilley Estates Partnership and Arcon Development, Inc. are requesting a rezoning of property from R-1 Rural Residential to R-1 Urban Residential to be compatible with the Comprehensive Plan Amendment of 1995 wherein the property was brought into the Municipal Urban Service Area (MUSA). Commissioner Jensen stated she was unsure as to which Comprehensive Plan to address since she heard conflicting legal opinions at the public hearing held earlier in the evening. She also mentioned she only just became aware this day of an attempt to put this land in a moratorium. She concluded she would like to hear from City Council since she's not familiar with all the issues, and she suggested the City Attorney should read the separate legal opinions mentioned at the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Jensen and seconded by Commissioner Dempsey to table the request from Reilley Estates Partnership and Arcon Development, Inc. for rezoning until the next Planning Commission meeting, pending legal opinion. Further Discussion: Commissioner Dempsey stated he would like to hear from City Administrator Norman, however, Mr. Norman deferred to the City Attorney. City Attorney Goodrich advised the Planning Commission that there is no legal impediment to acting at this time. If action is taken now, the current Comprehensive Plan is to be utilized; if tabled until after the new Comprehensive Plan is adopted, then that one will be utilized. As to the moratorium, interest was indicated at the November 24, 1998 City Council meeting. Since a quorum was not present at a meeting earlier this evening, it will again be placed on their December 8, 1998 meeting agenda. Mr. Goodrich assured the Planning Commission that they could legally act on the request tonight or they could legally table it, however, they must give reasons as to what they specifically want to happen. Mr. Goodrich advised State Statute requires action to be taken within 60 days, and since this request was filed on November 10, 1998, City Council must act upon it by January 10, 1999. The first City Council meeting in 1999 is January 12. If the Planning Commission tables the request until January, City Council will not be able to act before January 10. Therefore, if the Planning Commission chooses to table this request until January, the City must invoke the 60-day extension to the rule (also provided by State Statute). Mr. Goodrich also stated that the City has made no promises guaranteeing one-acre lots, and no action can be taken against the City. Officially, the City of Ramsey has no relationship with the builders and no obligations to their commitments. Upon inquiry, City Attorney Goodrich informed Chairperson Deemer that the moratorium takes precedence over the State Statute 60- day rule. Chairperson Deemer inquired whether the Planning Commission could recommend that the City invoke the 60-day extension. Mr. Goodrich replied it would be necessary to invoke the extension even if the moratorium ordinance is passed at the December 15, 1998 Council meeting, because the moratorium will not be effective until after 60 days has elapsed. Amendment by Chairperson Deemer and seconded by Commissioner Jensen to direct City Council to invoke the 60-day extension. Planning Commission/December 3, 1998 Page 4 of 9