CC_Minutes_2005_0124 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

January 24, 2005 Page 2 approval. The second was a request for an approval of a general concept for a planned unit development (PUD). On October 22, 2004, a petition for an EA W was submitted to the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) requesting that an EA W be prepared for the project. The EQB submitted the petition to the City on October 26, 2004. The City Council voted to dismiss the EA W petition on December 6, 2004. On January 10,2005, the City Council approved the proposed amendment to the Twin Lakes Master Site Plan. The City Council approved the preliminary plat and subdivision. The City Council approved the general concept plan for the PUD. As to those first two approvals, these are subject to approvals and pernlits required by the Rice Creek Watershed Organization and the Minnesota Depmiment of Natural Resources, as well as any approvals required by the Minnesota Department of Transportation. The general concept PUD is just that. A final PUD application and approval process is required pursuant to Chapter 1008 of the Roseville City Code. In addition to the three motions and approval set forth above, a first reading of an ordinance rezoning the Twin Lakes parcels from I-I, 1-2 and B-4 to planned unit development with an underlying zoning of B-6, mixed used business park, was approved by the Council, with the language included therein "to become effective after a second reading and upon final approval by the City Council of the planed unit development agreement and publication of the ordinance." It is to this last motion that our office understands there to be 60-day rule questions. DISCUSSION Minn. Stat. S 15.99 specifies that written requests relating to zoning, septic systems and/or expansion of a metropolitan urban service area for a pernlit, license, or other governmental approval of an action must be approved or denied within 60 days from the date of the application. The 60-day period can be extended for an additional 60 days by the municipality by providing written notice to the applicant, prior to the expiration of the deadline, stating the reasons for the extension, and stating its length. When a state statute or court order requires another process to occur before the agency acts on the request, the time limits are extended. This comes into play in regard to a petition for environmental review, as Minn. Stat. S 116D.04, subd. 2b, specifically states that a pernlit or approval on a project may not be granted by a municipal entity until a petition for an environmental assessment worksheet is dismissed. The 60-day time period begins to nm anew from the date of that decision. See,~, Kramer v. Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners, 647 N.W.2d 23 (Minn. App. 2002). The 60- day time period can be extended after such environmental review is completed, if it has not been extended once before. Id. It should be noted that there had been both district court opinions and a Court of Appeals decision on applications that had been made prior to June of2003 that a request for subdivision approval was not a "zoning request" to which the 60-day rule applied. See,~, Advantage Capital Management v. City of Northfield, 664 N.W.2d 421 (Minn. App. 2003); Save Lantern Bay v. Cass