1979 Development in Unsewered areaCITY \)F
EHINHISSEN
761 0 LAREDO DR IVE. P.O. BOX'I47'CHANHASSEN, MI NNESOTA 5531 7
(612) 474-8885
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE :
S UBJ:
Assistant City Planner, Bob Waibel
City Manager, Don Ashworth
January 8, 197 9
Development Proposals in the Unsewered Area
Approximately 1 to 2 years ago the city planner, in conjunction withthe city attorneyrs office, noted. that the Attorney General hadruled that parcels exceedj-ng five acres in sj.ze did not require
1oca1 approval prior to filing with the County Auditorrs office.Further, as current cj-ty ordinances allowed one building permit to
be issued on a legalIy divided parcel of land the city *ouIdl'torcea
to issue a building permit for such tracts. After meeting withthe planning commission, the city planner had recommended that a
moratorium be establ-ished to determine options open to the cityto determine whether estate developments should be consideredin the unsewered area. Various background work was completed; however,
no action was taken by the planning commission prornpti ng the planning
commj- ss ion/city planner to request an extension to the moratorium.
The city council approved the extension.
)^n\),
After several meetj-ngs concernj-ng this issue, the planning commission
acted to recomnend a basic policy that no devel-opment should occurj-n the unsewered area. In reviewing the planning commission re commenda-tion, the council appeared to support the concepts presented by theplanning conunission, but would not take action making "no develoment"as an absolute or without consideration of variance procedures.
Additionally, the concerns leading to the moratorium versus thepolicy decision being recommended by the planning commission provided
additional confusion - the bottom line of which being no action being
taken by the city councj-I.
The above points were s rulmari zed from my recollection of events and
some porti.ons of the above may be incorrect. However, it is my
understandj.ng that the original problem sti11 exists, i.e. that
an individual can record a divided parcel which exceeds five acresin size and can d.emand a building permit for the 1ega11y dividedparcel. I would ask that you verify that these statements are correct.
Additionall.y, assuming that the original problem does exj-st, I would
ask that you work in conjunction with the city attorneyrs office in
preparing a recomnendation which meets the concePts presented. by the
ptanning commission, i.e. prohibiting deveLopment in the unsewered
irea, while attempting to recognize city councif concerns that such
shoufd not be absolute and should provide a means by which variance
procedures can be cons idered.
I believe that the basic problem continues to revolve around the
ability of an owner to subdivide without gaining city approval'
t{owevei, should it be determined that for parcels in excess of
five acres, changes in the subdivision ordinance would not over-
come deficits of the Attorney Generalrs opinion, I would suggest
that an ordinance be prepared which would prohibit the issuance of
building permits on 1) metes and bounds parcels whj-ch were not
recorded is of i 2) are not legal- platted lots apProved
-2-
by the city council on or be fo re
lots of record on or before
of property apProved for building
mately the same as Lhat used for
January 8, 1979
; were not lega1 Platted
; Or are not S ubdivisions
pe rmi ts (the format being aPProxi-
subdivisions in the unsewered area) .
.(l #
CITY--OF
CHINHISSEN
7610 LAREDO DRIVE.P.O. BOX 147.CHANHASSEN, N/INNESOTA 55317
(612) 474-8885
Background
As you wilf remember, SLaff and the Planning Commission recomflendedthe Council- place a moratorium on building in the unsewered portion
of Chanhassen. Pursuant to Staff recommendations , the City Councilduly enacted City Ordinance 64, on May 9, 1977. Said moratorium
ordinance prohj-bits constructj-on in the unsewered portions of
Chanhassen if certain conditions are met. Said moratorium ordinance
was in force until December 3J-, 1977.
Purpose of Moratorium Ordinance
As shown in the attached, Ordinance 64, the purpose of the moratorium
ordinance was to qive Staff and Planning Commission sufficient time(breathing room) to formulate more effective control-s against buildingin the unsewered portions of the City. As you know, the Planning
Commission held five publj-c meetings to d.iscuss said moratorium ordinance
and associated problems with building in the unsewered portions of theCity.
Planning Conrmission Recommendation
According to the time schedule we set up, Staff and Commission
contempfated formulating a reconrmendation on the moratorium ordinanceby December 15, L97"1 . Unfortunately, my recent back surgery has causeda th'o-month delay in Staff formulating a reco[ulendation for Planning
Commission consideration. Because of these unforseen events, Staff
wou]d recommend the City Council extenal the moratorium ordinance until
March 31, 1978, to receive Staff and Commission recommendation onbuilding in the unsewered portions of the City.
1.
IVIEMORANDUM
DATE: January 19, 197 8
TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager
FROM: Bruce Pankonin, City Planner
SUBJ: Moratorium on Building in the Unse$rered Portions of Chanhassen
CITY OT' CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 64
AN INTERIM ORDINANCE TEI\,IPORARILY PROHIBITING CONSTRUCTTON OR
DEVELOPI,IENT WITHIN THE AREAS OF CHANHASSEN NOT SERVED BY CITY
SANITARY SEWER, AND PROVIDING A PENALTY FOR THE VIOLATTON THEREOF.
Section 1 Intent and Purpose.
This Ordinance is adopted for the purpose of:
Protecting the health, safety and welfare of the residents
and future residents of the City of Chanhassen; and
Allowing a reasonabfe time for this City to develop and
adopt an ordinance and other official controls which:
a. will regulate individual sewer disposal systems so as
to prevent contamination of underground bodies of
water or of streams, Iakes, rivers, or other surface
bodies of water; and
b. will prevent individual sewer disposal systems from
creating a health hazard or a nuisance for the
general public or for individuals; and
c. will make it unnecessary to provide central Public
sewage disposal systems for areas in the City of
Chanhassen not intended for urban development in the
foreseeable future, as shown by the Comprehensive Plan
for the City of Chanhasseni and
Protecting the planning processes of the City of Chanhassen
and its citizens.
4 Protectingr rights
the enactment of
inthis
property created prior to the date of
ordinance.
Section 2 Moratorium.
2.01 Prohibition. Pending the adoption of the aforesaid ordinance
-and
o fficial controls, no bu ilding permit sha]I be issued for the
2.02 Exc ep tions to Moratorium.
construction, erection or moving of any building on any tract of
Iand within the limits of the City not served by the municipal
sanitary sevJer system; and no person, firm or corporation shall
construct, erect or move any building upon any land within the
l"imits of the City not served by the municipal sanitary sewer system'
A ricultural Uses.
sha not proh I b I
The provisions of 52.01 of this ordinance
he issuance of building permits for
lized soleIy for agricultural uses and
dual sewer disposat sYstems. The
lture and agricultural uses applicable
shal1 be as set forth in the Chanhassen
tt
structures to be uti
not employing indivi
definition of agricu
under this ordinance
zoning ordinance.
I
-l -
1
2.
3.
Sin Residential Construction.
here na t er provr e e prov saons o
Except as
52.0I of thisordinance shalI not prohibit the issuance of building permitsfor single family residential construction or moving, andshall not prohibit such construction or moving if suchproposed single family residence is to be located:
a Upon an unimproved unplatted tract of land which wasof record in the offices of the county recorder orregistrar of titles on March L5, 1971, and which isnot less than two and one-half (2-l/2) acres in size
and wh j-ch shall have a front yard of not less thanfifty (50) feet, a side yard on one side of not lessthan one hundred (I00) feet, and a side yard on theother side of not less than ten (10) feet, a rear yardof not l-ess than fifty (50) feet, and which shalladjoin a public road or city street. The depth of each
such tract sha1l not be greater than tr^/o (2) timesthe width.
Upon an unimproved existing platted lot which shallcontain at least thirty thousand (30,000) sguare feet
and which sha1l have a front yard of not Iess thanthirty (30) feet, a side yard of not less than ten (10)
feet, and a rear yard of not less than thirty (30) feet,For purposes of this section an exj-sting platted lot
sha11 include an unimproved registered Iand survey ofrecord in the office of the registrar of titles on
March l-5, 197L, and which meets the standards of thissection.
C AII proposed building sites under 52.02(2) (a) and (b)
above shall be inspected by the city Building Inspector,
and no building permit shall be j.ssued for any site
on which, in the opinion of the building inspector,
an inadequate surface or subsurface drainage or soilporosity condition may exist. The applicant for abuilding permit may be required at the expense of theapplicant to furnish such engineering tests as the
building inspector may reasonably require to aid himin making his judgment, and in the exercise of saidjudgment he shall take into consideration the impactof the issuance of any such permit upon contiguousproperties.
PenaIty.
Any person, firm or corporation viol-ating the provisions of this
ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction
thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not to exceed Three hundreddollars ($300.00), imprisonment for not to exceed ninety (90) days,
or both.
-2-
2.
b.
Section 3.
Ie Famil
In the event any building or structure is constructed, erected, or
moved in violation of this ordinance, the zoning Administrator may
institute any proper action or proceedj-ng in the name of the City(a) to prevent such unlar,irful construction, erection, or moving,(b) to restrain or abate such violation; or (c) to prevent the use
or occupation of any such building or structure.
Section 4 Effective Date.
This Ordinance shall take effect from and after its
lication, and shall remain in force until the date
of the ordinance contempfated hereunder or December
whichever date occurs first,
Passed by the Council this 9th day of May
ATTEST
passage and pub
of the adoption
3t, 1977,
t977.
)
c a t Manager C er
Published in Carver County Herald on
ayor
May 12 L977.
-3-
AN ORDTNANCE AMENDTNG sEcrroN 2.o2 oF ORDTNANCE No. 64, ENTTTLED "ANINTERIM ORDINANCE TEMPORARILY PROHIBTTING CONSTRUCTION OR DEVELOPMENTWITHIN THE AREAS OF CHANHASSEN NOT SERVED BY CITY SANITARY sEwER, ANDPROVTDING A PENALTY FOR THE VIOI,ATION THEREOFII , BY ADDING THERETO SECTION2-02(3), 2.02(4), and Z.O2(5\.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COI'NTTES, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 64-A
THE CITY COUNCIT OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS:
SECTTON 1.Section 2 -02 of Ordi.nance
3. VARIANCES. Thfrom the requiFamily Residenof land wherethe fol lowing
hereby alnended by adding thereto thefollows:
-N9: 61, adopted May 9, 1977,following subsections to read
1S
as
e City Council may grant a variancerements of Section 2.02(2t Singletial- Construction, as to speciiic tractsit is shown and the City Council findsfacts:
a) That there are special circumstances orconditions affecting the land referredto in the application for the variance.
b) That the granting of the variance isnecessary for the preservation and en-joyment of substantial property rights.
c) That the granting of the applicationwill not be materially detrimental tothe public welfare or injurious toproperty in the area ad jacent to theproperty for w ac h the variance is sought.
d) That the grant of the variance does notadversely affect the purpose and intentof this ordinance.
4. VARIANCE PROCEDURE.Written application for a
sha fI
all f
sha 11
va r ]. ancebe filed wi. th the City, and shatl stare fullyacts relied upon by the applicant. The appli-ationbe supplemented with maps, soil studies, andengj-neering data which may aid in an analysis of thematter. The application may be referred to the CityEngineers, City Planners and City Building Inspectoifor their study, recommendation and repora to Lne CityCouncil, and the cost of any such referral and all otlrerCity Administrative expense sha11 be borne by the applicant.
;
5. COUNCIL ACTION.ty unlounc
No variance shal1 be granted by the
ess it shall have received the affirm-ative vote of at least four-fifths of the ful1 Council.
SECTION 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance shaLl become effective
E;6m--E;A-f tE r-f EE-EEEEEE e -a nd pu b I i c a t i on .
Passed by the Council this 19th day of epternbe r 1977.
ATTEST :
C ty-c er Manage r
Published in Carver County Herald on the 28th day of Septenber L977.
-2-
\, \7
REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING FEBRUARY 22, T978
Roman Roos called
following members
and Jerry Neher.
absent.
the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. with thepresent: Dlck Matthews, Ma1 MacAlpine, Hud Hollenback,
Les Bridger came at 9:00 p.m. Walter Thompson was
MINUTES: AneNd the molion undcr MARVEL EGGAM SUBDIVISION in the
Febmary 8, 1978, Planning Commission minutes as folIows3 Jerry Neher
moved to recornmend the Council approve the preliminary plat for
Marvel EEgam dated February 8, 1978, and qrant a varlance to the
Subdivisl-on Ordinance wherein the requLrement for topographicdata be wal-ved. The Planning Commisslon instructed the applicantto prepare the final plat pursuant to Ordinance 33, Section 10.04.
Motion seconded by Walter Thompson. The fol-Iowing voted in favor:
Roman Roos, Jerry Neher, DLck Matthews, and Walter Thompson. Hud
Hol-lenback voted no. Motl-on carried.
GOVERNOR'S COMMISSION ON CRIME PREVENTION: John MerriLf from the
Governo-rs Cornmlssion on Crime Prevention gave a sl ide presentation
ESTATE DEVELOPMENTS: In the spring of 1977, the Pl-anning Commission
undertook a stuily to consider relaxj-ng City ordinance 45 by allowing
subdivisions of land in areas of the community which are not presently
served wl-th sanl-tary sewer. The common moniker the Planninq
Comml-ssl-on and staff placed on this subject was "Estate Development".
The princlpal hypothesis offered by the study is that the
uncontrolled proliferation of new housing starts, in the unsewered
portion of the clty, r,riIl adversely affect the health, safety, and
wel-fare of the coNnunity. By encouraging development to locate
l-n the sewered portions of the city, however, will insure that
private devel-opment will follow publ-ic investment, rather than the
reverse, which has been the t.raditional pattern. It is hoPed that
such practlces wilI not only promote the use of already existing
public facilities to their maximum capacity, but wiLl al-so ml-nimize
additional- pubtic investments, particularly those of an unplanned
and unexpected nature .
To manage Chanhassen's encumbered municipal debt so as to conserve
Amend the motion under ELIZABETH SWEIGER SUBDIVISfON in the February
8, 1978, Plannlng Commission minutes as follows: Pursuant to Councilaction, Jerry Neher moved to approve the resubdivision for Elizabeth
Sweiqer wlth the stipulatJ.on that the easterly most lots will be
87.5 feet of frontage each and the corner lot have f05 feet offrontage. Mrs. Sweiger was instructed to prepare a final plat
pursuant to Ordinance 33, Section 10.04. The Planning Commission
recommended that the subdlvider petltion for city water. Motion
seconded by Walter Thompson and unanimously approved.
Jerry Neher moved to approve the February 8, 1978, Planninq Commission
minutes as amended. Iulotion seconded by Hud Hollenback. The following
voted l-n favor: Roman Roos, Jerry Neher, Dick Matthews, and Hud
Hollenback. Mal MacAlpine abstained. Motion carried.
and suggested numerous ways in which landscape design can deter
crime. The Planning Commission, in concert with the Carver County
Sheriff's Department, will review all site plans with Mr. Merrillrs
comments in mind.
\,
P1annlng Commission Meeting !'ebruary 22, 19b -2-
credit and taxes, the cl-ty should adopt a policy of channeling all
nev, growth into those areas of the city which are currently servedwith sanl"tary sewer. sal,d channeling of growth, could be defined asthe "Urban ReservoLr Concept".
outward urban expansion of the twin city metropolitan area, which has
been occurrlng ln the l-ast quarter century is and hopefully will
continue to transform areas of "rura1" Chanhassen lnto an urban
economy and environment. The urban reservoLr concept proposes todelineate those areas of the city which r^rilt have to undergourbanlzatlon by the year 1990. The urban reservoir concept is basedprimarity on exLsting urban development, availability of sanitary
sewer and water expansion, vehicular access, both existing andplanned, anal enthusiastic populatl-on growth allocated for Chanhassenas a proportLon of total metropolitan growth,
Within Chanhassen, the urban reservoir concept would divide thecity l-nto three tlistinct types of land use:
A. Urban Reservoir
The urban reservoir is that area of the city which is or will be
developed into a residential density so as to retire the city's
encumbered debt. The urban reservoir contains approximately 3,000
acres of developable residentlal land. Withln this area the city
can expect 21,000 people to reside in 6500 dweJ.ling units.
B. Sub-Urban Reservoir
The sub-urban area ls proposed to be urbanized after the city can
see a positlve cash flow to the existing municipal debt. The
sub-urban area is that area of the community (approximately 1,800
acres excludlng the Arboretum and Lake Minnewashta Regional Park)
whlch will receive interceptor sewer service after the installation
of the Lake Ann Interceptor Phase II.
C. Rural Area
The rural- area of the community should remain rural until after
the urban and sub-urban reservoir reach a saturation and sanitary
sewer ls provided to the Lake Riley Creek and Bluff Creek watersheds.
By channeli.ng all growth of the city, for the short term, into the
existing sewered service area wil1, hopefully, be sufficient to pay
the city's existing debt. By leaving the sub-urban and rural area
in an open state w111 allow an orderly development into these areas
after the installation of necessary sanitary sewer and water. without
growth in the sub-urban and rural area, the potential' for increased
publlc l-nvestrents for neu, roads, sehrer, water, police and fire
protection, parks and schools wiII be reduced and said caPital costs
can be channeled into the ex j.sting urban reservolri because, the
cltyrs infra-structure Ls not ileveloped to a sufficlent scale so
as Lo handle developnent other than the exl-sting rural economy and
envirorunent.
The urban regervoir concept should be the fundamental Premise upon
which the city-s plan should be developed. After this issue has
been answered by lhe cJ-ty council-, all of chanhassen's urban and
Planning Commlssion Meeti-ng February 22,7978
rural- development r^r111 fal1 J.nto place and the citycapltal- improvements budget to implement the city's
and rural area.
-3-
can develop afuture urban
Les BrJ.dger moved the adoptLon of a resolution that the planning
CommLssion endorses the Plannerrs Urban Reservoir,/Sub-Urban Reservoir,/Rural Area concept descrlbed In the Planner's report dated February
21 , 1978. Motlon seconded by Mal MacAlpJ.ne and unanimously approved.
Members commented on the above resolution.Dick l{attheres - I have reaal the report and I donrt have any problems
wlth it. The areas of the soj-I, that's informationthat I guess I donrt truly understand.
MaJ- MacAlpLne - I have no problem with it.
Les Bridger - I have read the report and f also am in agreement withlts context.
Hud Hollenback - Agreed .Jerry Neher - I have read the report and f am in complete agreementwith it.
Roman Roos - I, in like manner, agree to It. We have to make surethat private development is going to fol1ow public
lnvestxnent and that's baslcally what this is aII about.
Hud Hollenback moved the adoptLon of a resolution that the Planning
ComrnLssl-on endorses the concept of channell-nq all residentlal qrowth
into the sewered areas of the City. Motion seconded by Jerry Neher
and unanimously approved .
Members commented on the above resolutlon.
Jerry Neher - It is important to me that we do that for fiscal purposes.
Hud HoLlenback - Agreed .
Les Bridger - f have no problem wlth it.
Mal- MacAlpine - No problem.
Dick l4atthews - No problem.
Roman Roos - we mention residentl-al, should we also involve lndustrial
and commercial?
Bruce PankonLn - ordinance 45, as presently structured, says no
building permlts for commercLal and industrial uses
w111 be issued \.rithout sanitary sewer.
Roman Roos - If that be so, then T agree also.
Dick Matthews moved the adoption of a resolution that the Planning
Commission endorses a policy of diminishing the need. for further
sanitary sewer and watermain extensions by creating stricter
performance standards for on-site septlc system. Motion seconded
by MaI MacAlpine and unanimously approved.
Mernbers commented on the above resolution.
Dick Matthews - By stricter performance standards, who is going to
determine that?
Craig Mertz - The Englneer can make recommendation to you on what
type of technical Performance should be exPected of
a modern septic system and you make your judqment on
that. obviously, stricter ls an indefinite term but
the idea is conveyed that this is a tlevice that you
\.itant to use to guard against sevrer problems in the
unsewered area .
Dick Matthews - Then, 1et's say that an existJ-ng residence has
)
3
1
4
Plannlng Commlsslon Meeting February 22, L918 -4-
a septic systen and it goes hay wire. If that goes
baril, then doeg this take over and do we lnsist that
he put ln our nes, adopted approved better system?
Bruce Pankoni.n - We have to determlne what is stricter. As I see whatwill happen, the city will provlde a more frequent
inspectJ-on role than what exlsts right now so thatthe problemq w111 be headed off before they are
ProblemsJerry Neher - There are many septic systems in the city today thatare not doing the job. I would Ilke to see the word
changed on that to "much stricter".
Cralg Mertz - If you endorse this pol-icy what I would see is thatthe engineer be tol-d to make gome recommendation to you
on what should be in an on-site septlc ordinance andat that time you !'rould hit the is sue of h/hat are you
going to do, are you going to treat the existing systemthe sane as the new system.
MaI MacAl"pine - It is somethlng that should be fairly clear. It
could be a hot issue.
Jerry Neher - I believe by the very virtue of this Lt means we are
going to have a stricter ordinance of some sort in the
near future.
Les Bridger - To what degree of change are we talking about, new
' systesn or o1d system?
Bruce Pankonin - We havenrt reaIly Eiven it any thought.
Les Bridger - Thatrs the only hang up f rve got with it.
Hud Holl,enback - No questions. T agree.JerryNeher-Iagree.
Roman Roos - I thlnk it's a very irportant resolution and I \^tant to
make sure that we note that itrs related to ltem li9
and Lt's an effective way of, controlling growth in
i_tem #9.
Jerry Neher moved the adoption of a resolution that the Planning
Commission endorses a policy of refusing to entertain residential
PUD appl-ications for the areas outside of the urban reservoir.
Motion seconded by Hud Hollenback and unanlmously aPproved.
5
6
7
I
MaI MacAlplne moved the adoption of a resolution that the Planning
commissLon endorses a policy of in-fill-ing and,/or developing those
areas of the City where capitaf investments have aLready been made
in the form of sewers and water facilities. Motion seconded by
Les Bridger and unani-mously approved.
Hud Hollenback moved the adoption of a resolutlon that the Planning
CommlssLon will establish a capital l.mprovements program which will-
regul-ate the future extension of sanitary sewer and water. Motion
seconded by Dick Matthe$rs and unanimously apProved.
Jerry Neher moved the adoption of a regolution that the Planning
Commissl"on ls concerned about the size of the City's bonded
indebtedness and endorses a pollcy of channellng all residential
growth into the "urban reservoirrr for Purposee of maintaininq the
iiscal integrity of the Clty. Motion seconded by Hud Hollenback and
unanimously approved.
Les Bridger moved the adoption of a resolutlon that
CommissLon endorses a policy of i.enying resrCenlial
the Planning
:::.:lCi:rg Permits
.\,
22, L978
located outside of
-5-
the urban
Planning Commission l,leeting February
to all newly created lots or tracts
9
reservoLr. MotLon seconded by Jerry Neher and unanimously approved.
Mal MacAlpine moved the adoptJ,on of a resolution that the planning
Corutission end.orses a pollcy of strictJ.y applying the Ordinance 47
mLnimum 1ot sl-zes to all residentlal bulldlng permit applicationsfor exl-sting lots or tracts located outside of the urbln reservoir.Motl-on seconded by Dick Matthews and unanimously approved.
Hud Hollenback moved the adoption of a resolution that the CityStaff and attorney be empowered to proceed with an inventory of Cityordinances whl"ch conflict with the ibove descrlbed policies and be
empowered to proceed with the drafting of the appropriate amendmentsand comprehensl-ve city plan for consideration by the pJ-anning
CommissLon and the City Council by December 31, 1978. Motionseconded by Jerry Neher and unanimously approved.
COUNCIL MINUTES :The Council minutes of February 6, 1978, vrerediscussed by the Planningr Commisslon.
MaI MacAlpine moved to adjourn. Motion seconded by Dick Matthesrs
and unanimously approved. Meeting adjourned at 1I:10 p.m.
I0.
Don Ashworth
City Manager
J-sa-tg
^c
Retr/-\,orj AJ.
eI t - zz)t r{ed l\ C\.," \.u)t A1 t tty't .'i,.1
ctqylt ( ot0,.,al
r.,l{'l Mrt< [)
endorses Planner's
concept descr j.bed
C,*,.
+s
6ior.ler
Urbanin the
Re servo ir/Planner's
{
t
I'l {rq'rs.., L.J
rJo{ R'.rni ln llc
t\
2. Resolved that the PC endorsesa1I residential growth into the ser^rered
4, Resolved that the PC endorsesentertain residentiaf PUD appl icationsurban reservoir.
1. Resolved that the PC
Sub-Urban Reservoir/RuraI Areareport dated February 2I , 1978.
6 Resolved that the pC
8. Resolved that the PCbuildinq permits to all nevrly
the
are as
a policy of refusingfor the areas outs ide
concept of channe l ingof the City.
3. Resolved that the pC endorses a policy of dj.minishing theneed for further sanitary sewer and water main extensions by cr6atingeRnperformance standards for on-site septic system.5rtcl
5. Resolved that the PC endorses a policy
areas of the City where capital investments havein the form of sewers and water facilities.
3 r J. r.1.., "of in-filling, thosdalready been made
o u. nr-{+s scl^.d
to
of the
,*(e
the
of
residential
outside
t"CA ,{el ru,
7. Resolved that the PC is concerned about the size ofCity's bonded undebtedness and endorses a policy of channellngaII residential. growth into the "urban reservoirn for purposesmaintaining the fiscaL integrity of the City.
endorses a policy of denyingcreated Iots or tracts locatedof the urban reservoir.
rl9. Resovled that the PC endorsethe Ordinance 47 minimum 1ot size#totions for existing lotsor tracts locatreservoar.
s a polic.v of
"ftl'B=til&tnqed outside of
strictly applyingpermit appl ica-the urban
10. Resolved thatproceed with an inventothe above described po).drafting of the appropr
and the City Council ba
Staff and attorney be empowered toordinances which conflict wi th
:e#:+F::ss" E$c:::i:: xi'tnlni"
the Cityry of Cityicies andiate amend
rzf zt ,/ 't z.
* -llz
rn€*it€,**+rn--a.n-ft @+_i <qrrr?rr.a,until the in-filling of the Erbaa reservoire has -eea eefirp Ie ted