Laserfiche WebLink
applicant providing a list of the partnership members <br />of Lake Elmo Heights Limited Partnership as required in <br />the Lake Elmo City Code, and subject to applicant <br />paying a park dedication fee of $250 for each newly <br />created lot. <br />15. On July 15, 1987, the City of Lake Elmo entered <br />into a developers agreement with Lake Elmo Heights, a <br />Minnesota Limited Partnership, for Lake Elmo Heights <br />2nd Addition and Lake Elmo Heights 2nd Addition - out <br />Lot A. <br />This agreement recognizes that Out Lot A was restricted <br />to the development of one single family residential <br />unit on the entire 93 acres, and that the land would be <br />set aside as part of the City's development regulations <br />which allowed the cluster development of Lake Elmo <br />Heights and Lake Elmo Heights 2nd Addition. <br />WHEREAS, the land being sought for detachment is a <br />platted lot allowed by the City under its Rural Residential <br />Cluster Standards; and <br />WHEREAS, Lake Elmo residents on lots within Lake Elmo <br />Heights and Lake Elmo Heights 2nd Addition have advised the <br />City that they purchased their property with the <br />understanding that Out Lot A would continue to be used for <br />Agricultural and/or Open Space purposes consistent with the <br />City's cluster development regulations; and <br />WHEREAS, the proposed concurrent detachment and <br />annexation would be of no benefit to the City of Lake Elmo <br />and may further establish this procedure as a method of <br />resolving differences in development philosophies between <br />the City of Lake Elmo and individual landowners within the <br />City, and would serve to erode the integrity and <br />effectiveness of the City's Comprehensive Plan and <br />subdivision regulations; and <br />WHEREAS, the proposed concurrent detachment/annexation <br />would allow the petitioner to have the effect of taking <br />advantage of the City's development regulations when it <br />served his purpose, but ignore the development regulations <br />when they did not serve his purpose. <br />NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council <br />for the City of Lake Elmo strongly opposes the proposed <br />detachment and annexation of said property; and <br />FURTHER, that the City Council for the City of Lake <br />has determined that it is not, under any circumstances, in <br />the best interest of the City of Lake Elmo that said <br />concurrent detachment and annexation be approved. <br />