The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2.b. Transition Residential Property North of 135th StreetAGENDA ITEM: Transition Residential Property North of 135 AGENDA SECTION: PREPARED BY: Kim Lindquist, Community Development Director��° Andy Brotzler, City Engineer ATTACHMENTS: Location Map APPROVED BY: RECOMMENDED ACTION: Provide Staff Direction 4 ROSEMOUNT ISSUE CITY COUNCIL City Council Work Session: February 15, 2006 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ti Some time ago, staff discussed the County Road 38 road project with the City Council At that time there was some discussion about the ramifications of upgrading the street and extending utilities in \the area for those rural residential or agricultural properties north of County Road 38. Staff wants to clarify the Council's position because we are aware that there are developers looking at various properties in this area. DISCUSSION Staff is aware that developers are looking at the properties north of old County Road 38, east of Bacardi Avenue, and south of 130 Street. The vast majority of the land is owned by the Nieland family. There are other parcels also in the area One developer has come to the city with a concept that included much of this "block" It is staffs understanding t at the Council recognized that property owners affected by the road and utility upgrade an assessments would be permitted to develop, after a formal planning review process. H wever, in this particular area, it would appear that more than just the properties immediately djacent to old CR 38 would be developed. One reason is that the ownership extends further n rth than just the properties immediately next to the road. From a planning and engin r ering sta dpoint, it would be preferable to have the entire area developed concurrOntly so th road systems, neighborhood access, and regional ponding could be designed CONCLUSION Staff is requesting clarification fr m the Council regarding their intentions about property north of old County Road 38, eas of Bacardi Avenue. This area is designated Transition Residential and is already located within the City MUSA boundary However, the property is zoned agriculture. Is the Council comfortable with all properties in the area being developed or would the preference be to only allow properties immediately adjacent to the County Road 38 road project develop at a more urbanized rate If the whole "block" were to develop some time in the future, staff would expect 130 to serve as the dividing line between urban and rural development.