Laserfiche WebLink
Page 17 <br /> a f�r�al appl;ca�ion by �he lan�oti�;ner for a building �permit at this � <br /> time ti�;ould be s��bject to the exist;ng zoning classification. ihus, <br /> any subsequent rezoning of the� property aft2r formal application would <br /> • not be legally enforceable. <br /> The basic problem with this approach is that it could not adequately <br /> . deal with many of the issues raised previously. Furthermore, unless <br /> there is adequate data available to the city to substantiate �the <br /> rezoning, the lando�.vrer mignt determine to sue the city on the basis <br /> that the rezoning is arbitrary and capricious. In addition, since the <br /> rezoning would in effect amount to a downzoning, the property owners <br /> might cha7lenge the rezoning on the basis of a "taking" of property <br /> without just compensation. <br /> Alternative 3: Initiate some form of moratorium on the constr��ction until <br /> the prev�ous various issues have been resolved or until <br /> the current planning program is completed. <br /> A third option would be for the city to pass a moratorium ordinance <br /> placing a moratorium on either (1) . all proposed marinas in the city or <br /> (2) on any development proposal in the general area of'' Stubbs Bay. <br /> This moratorium should be for a specified period of time such as six <br /> or twelve months. The major rationale for the moratorium would be to <br /> permit the city to undertake additional specific studies to attempt <br /> to resolve some of the issues discussed previously. In addition, the <br /> city might extend the moratorium unt�l the completion of the planning <br /> program to help answer Issue �3. <br /> This approach is the surest alternative to stop any development in the <br /> area. In addition, the passing of a moratorium ordinance placing a mora- <br /> torium on development proposals until the completion of a planning program <br /> has been upheld by the Minnesota Supreme Court in the Marshan Township <br /> Case. . <br /> . In light of the potential advantages and disadvantages of the_various <br /> approaches discussed above, this consultant would recommend the third <br /> alternative, at least until some additional studies could be undertaken <br /> to answer some of the issues. It should be noted, that this action would <br /> not necessarily be required until a formal application was received <br /> from the landowner. In addition, the moratorium ordinance should only <br /> be in effect for a specified period of time and should be carefully drafted. <br /> ; . <br />