INFORMATION #4 07-22-2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

William C. Griffith, Jr. July 22, 2002 Page 3 DRAFT The procedure of the Elk River City Council is to consider planning items on the third Monday of each month. Although the City Council had two regular meetings between June 17 and July 15, 2002, pursuant to the Council's procedures, no planning items were scheduled for either of these meetings. (See enclosed agendas for the June 24, 2002 and July 8, 2002 City Council meetings.) All planning items arising from the Planning Commission's June meetings, and all planning items continued from the City Council's June planning agenda, were scheduled for the City Council's July planning agenda, on July 15, 2002. This included not only Tollefson's Development, but also four other planning items tabled or continued from the Council's June 17, 2002 planning agenda to the July 15, 2002 planning agenda. (See Items No. 3.2, 3.3, 3.4 and 6.7 on the June 17, 2002 agenda, a copy of which is enclosed.) We do not believe that Tollefson has the right to determine, after the fact, what the "next earliest pOssible date" was for City Council consideration of the Development. Tollefson made a request that the City continue consideration of his Development to the "next earliest possible date with the city council". The City Council determined what that date was, continued consideration to that date, and advised Tollefson of the continuance and the new date for consideration, all within the 60 days mandated by Minnesota Statutes, Section 15.99. We believe the facts set forth above are more than enough to comply with the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Section 15.99. However, there are additional facts in this matter which make it clear that July 15, 2002 was the earliest possible meeting at which the City Council could have considered the Development. Tollefson's June 17, 2002 letter requested continuance of the Development because it was "in the process of finishing.~up the revisions to our pl .ans for Twin Lakes Crossing". The revised grading plan for the Development was not received by the City until July 8, 2002. This plan was immediately submitted to the TEP and was reviewed by the TEP in a meeting held on July 11, 2002. The revised plan and TEP's comments were then submitted to the City Council for action at the previously scheduled continued hearing on July 15, 2002. Even if the City Council did not have the right to determine that July 15, 2002 was "the next earliest possible date" for the City Council to consider the Development, in fact, July 15, 2002 turned out to be the earliest possible council meeting following submission by Tollefson of the revised plans referred to in its letter requesting a continuance at which the Development could be considered. We do not believe that Minnesota Statutes, Section 15.99 requires that this Development be approved as of June 24, 2002, before Tollefson had even submitted the revised plans that Tollefson itself requested a continuance to have time to prepare.