Laserfiche WebLink
COUNCIL MINUTES <br />DECEMBER 17, 2001 <br />Mr. Blanchet noted the City Planner had indicated that the moratorium could be extended, and it has <br />been his experience that this occurs for nearly all moratoriums. He indicated that Mr. Uhde was <br />greatly concerned by the amount of time the proposed moratorium could delay his project. <br />Mr. Blanchet pointed out that the proposed moratorium would not apply to the City's Town Center <br />area because of the grants that had been extended to help fulfill certain City goals. Likewise, Mr. <br />Uhde, in anticipation of developing the various phases of Behms Century Farm, has invested <br />hundreds of thousands of dollars to bring public utilities to his property. He stated that having this <br />project held up by the moratorium would not allow Mr. Uhde to move forward with his goals. <br />Mr. Blanchet stated he was also concerned about the distinctions be' <br />residential developments and the Village area would be exempt fro <br />the moratorium would apply to larger scale residential developments <br />to draw a distinction between types of residential development <br />to set different regulations between uses, but in this case the <br />distinction was arbitrary. <br />in which small-scale <br />d moratorium but <br />at this was attempting <br />State law allows a city <br />same. Therefore, he felt the <br />Mr. Blanchet noted in his report to the City Council t <br />due to the comprehensive plan's policy of reducing gro <br />establishing what Mr. Blanchet argued was a "ca <br />Minnesota Statutory authority that would allow <br />believed that if a proposed structure meets <br />then the plans for that structure should be <br />wishes to control growth and has that ri <br />growth was to maintain public health <br />He indicated the City's charter req <br />Mr. Uhde has done. Therefore, he dig <br />moratorium or a cap on buildi <br />son for the proposed moratorium was <br />e City's intent to control growth by <br />'lding permits. He stated that there was no <br />establish a cap on building permits. He <br />f the building code and is a permitted use <br />e forward. He acknowledged that the City <br />ever, he noted that the intent behind controlling <br />ensure adequate public infrastructure is in place. <br />ers to pay for and provide public infrastructure, which <br />public infrastructure reason for establishing a <br />wed <br />Mr. Blanchet asked that Mr. be a itted to move forward and continue to work with City staff <br />with his developm <br />e offer'; o answer questions. <br />Councilmember Carls <br />City Planner Smyser st <br />Environmental Board, th <br />ed what City Boards will be represented on the proposed Task Force. <br />that the Task Force was proposed to consist of two members of the <br />anning & Zoning Board and the Economic Development Authority. <br />Councilmember Carlson requested confirmation that the Park Board would be brought into the <br />process when and if an issue arises under their jurisdiction. City Planner Smyser stated that this was <br />correct. <br />Councilmember Carlson suggested that the Staff Report describing the proposed scope of the <br />moratorium regarding smaller developments be amended to state, "Subdivisions that result in up to <br />four residential lots would be exempt..." She felt this amendment would clarify that the moratorium <br />does not apply to commercial and industrial developments. <br />