Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Council Meeting Minutes <br />August 27, 1996 <br /> <br />Page 5 <br /> <br />Council Business. continued <br /> <br />The two pending applications (Tom Thumb and Cadwallader) need to be reviewed by the <br />committee to determine merit and if they should be exempt from the ordinance. If a <br />proposal has merit, then review by the Planning Commission and Council is needed. <br /> <br />Gunderman asked if the ordinance has been published and when it would become <br />effective. Mattila said the second reading has occurred, but it has not been published. <br />LeFevere said the ordinance is legally effective the day following publication. Fulton <br />said Council had approved the moratorium earlier in the Consent Agenda. Williams <br />supports creation of the special study committee. <br /> <br />Larson stated the need for the committee to determine if a project warrants further <br />research by staff or review by Counci1. Fulton said the Planning Commission prefers the <br />committee determine whether an exemption should be considered, and then <br />recommendation is sent to the Planning Commission and subsequently to Counci1. <br /> <br />Jake Cadwallader, developer, said his proposal involves acquisition of three single family <br />homes, demolishing the homes, rezoning to R-3B, and constructing townhomes on the <br />site. He began property acquisition months ago, but days before submitting the <br />application was told of the moratorium. On August 13, Council gave second reading of <br />the ordinance, and requested review by the Planning Commission. At that time, <br />Cadwallader requested a public hearing on August 20, but received a letter stating the <br />moratorium serves to deny any pending development within the moratorium. League of <br />Minnesota Cities states the effective date of an ordinance is one day after publication, to <br />this date the ordinance has not been published. Why was he denied a public hearing <br />when another Hwy 8 proposal was considered on August 20? He requested to be <br />allowed to go through the rezoning process. <br /> <br />Vera Adams, 284 -8th Ave., said Cadwallader is finding her property, and the <br />moratorium is a real hardship because of her plans to move into a condominium. <br /> <br />Williams said the EDC supports the need to apply higher priority on certain study areas. <br />As soon as the RFP is released, the consultant can review the areas. Meanwhile, the <br />Committee should look at priority areas to determine merit in pending proposals. <br />Community Development Director Kevin Locke said the RFP is ready to be released. <br /> <br />Motion by Williams, seconded by Gunderman, to DIRECT MAYOR TO APPOINT A <br />SIX-MEMBER SPECIAL STUDY COMMITTEE CONSISTING OF THREE <br />MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THREE MEMBERS OF <br />THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION WITH THE COUNCIL <br />REPRESENTATIVES TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION <br />AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTING AS EX.OFFICIO MEMBERS; <br />THAT SPECIAL STUDY COMMITTEE BE AUTHORIZED TO OVERSEE THE <br />DEVELOPMENT OF THE HIGHWAY 8 CORRIDOR PLAN, CONSIDER AND <br />ADVISE THE COUNCIL ON ANY EXCEPTIONS TO THE MORATORIUM <br />ORDINANCE; AND THAT TIDS BE PERFORMED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. <br /> <br />4 Ayes - 0 Nayes, Motion Carried. <br /> <br />Williams said in no way was the moratorium meant to be punitive against any project. <br />The plan is out of date, and the worst scenario is implementation of incorrect land usage <br /> <br />Council Business <br /> <br />H wy 8 Corridor <br />Study <br />Report 96-197 <br />