Laserfiche WebLink
Mary Kueffner <br />September 2, 1994 <br />Page 2 <br />A reasonable comparison of the 1980 and 1994 Development <br />Proposals indicates that the 1994 Proposal is substantially <br />different in scope and intensity from the 1980 Application. For <br />this reason, it has been my advice to the City that the District <br />Court Order does not require the City to judge the 1994 Application <br />by the standards contained in the 1979 Comprehensive Plan. <br />In my judgment, an additional relevant action has been taken <br />since the District Court's Order. The City has, in fact, completely amended the 1979 version of its Comprehensive Plan. The District Court did not prevent the City from taking further <br />legislative action which could affect the development rights of <br />Lake Elmo property owners. <br />The Federal Land Company has now requested tAat the City <br />review its 1994 Application based upon the standards contained in <br />the 1979 Comprehensive Plan; and has further requested that its <br />1994 Application be reviewed by the standards contained in the 1990 <br />version of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The former action seems <br />unnecessary in light of the District Court decision. However, the <br />applicant is entitled to a decision from the City Council on that <br />issue. <br />It seems to me that the City can decide whether to process the <br />application in that manner pursuant to the 1979 Comprehensive Plan. <br />If it chooses to proceed, the 1979 standards would apply. If it <br />chooses not to proceed, it could simply state its reasons and <br />proceed to review the application pursuant to the standards <br />contained in the 1990 Comprehensive Plan. In this way, I believe <br />the applicant could obtain a decision from the City Council which <br />could be reviewed in one action before the District Court if the <br />applicant so chooses. <br />JPF:bap <br />Very truly yours, <br />Jerome P. Filla <br />