HomeMy Public PortalAbout1994-007Member Ann Thies introduced the following resolution and moved its
adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION NO. 94-07
RESOLUTION DENYING REQUEST FROM FRED KELLER
FOR AMENDMENT TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
WHEREAS, Fred Keller (the "Applicant") is the owner of approximately 21
acres located on Willow Drive south of Medina Morningside, which is identified as PID
Nos. 28-118-23-14-0001 and 28-118-23-14-0002 (the "Property"); and
WHEREAS, the Property is zoned rural residential and the city's 1992
Comprehensive Plan (the "Plan") calls for the Property to remain rural and not be
included within the urban services area; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has proposed developing the Property into 17 lots,
which development would require an amendment to the Plan and rezoning consistent
therewith; and
WHEREAS, the city initiated a complete review in 1989 of its 1980
comprehensive plan, which amendment did not receive final approval from the
Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities until 1992; and
WHEREAS, the city at first proposed that the Property be added to the urban
services area but such request was rejected by the Metropolitan Council by a letter
dated April 26, 1991; and
WHEREAS , while the Metropolitan Council had previously authorized extending
sanitary sewer to the Medina Morningside neighborhood, it did so only to prevent
pollution from the failing on -site septic systems within that area; and
WHEREAS, the amended comprehensive plan adopted in 1992 represented three
years' work and a thorough review of the boundaries of the urban services area; and
RHB64750
ME230-194
WHEREAS, acceptance of the Applicant's request would require an amendment
to a Plan only recently given final approval and involve a parcel specifically rejected
by the Metropolitan Council for inclusion in the sewer area.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Medina, Minnesota that the Applicant's request for an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan to permit urban development of the Property is denied at this
time for the following reasons:
1. The proposed development is inconsistent with the Plan and would
necessitate a change in the Plan; and
2. The Plan was only recently adopted and there exists no reason at this
time to re-examine the boundaries of the urban service district.
Dated : February 15
ATTEST:
, 1994.
rrTE„ ,
orison, Nerk-Treasurer
Anne E. Theis , Mayor
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
James Johnson
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof :
Council Members Johnson, Thies, Zietlow and Mayor Theis
and the following voted against same: None
Absent: Council Member John Ferris.
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted .
RHB64750
ME230-194