The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSP June 20, 1974 (\ ,~. . ,< .. ¡;.-vw ',-- ~' '- . Tvwn~hip ,,> ,>:' - ~" MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING - HELD JUNE 20 1974 COON RAPID PETITION TO ANNEX CROOKED LAKE AREA IN GROW CITY OF AN KA PETITION TO ANNEX SECTION #30 IN GROW Chairman S hneider called the meeting to order at 8:04 p.m., also attending were Supervisor Christenson, Deputy Clerk Marilyn Kappelhoff and others. Absent Sup rvisor Holasek. Chairman S hneider opened the meeting by explaining Grow Township and Ramsey Township Incorporat on Hearing held June 10, 1974 at 10:00 a.m., at the Anoka County Courthouse. Chairman S hneider stated to the audience that this Hearing was held for the purpose of establis hing the Rum River as the natural boundary between Ramsey and Grow, but lue to an rror in the Hearing Notice, another Hearing will be held on July 15, 1974, at 10:00 a. ., at the Anoka County Courthouse and prior to the June 10th Hearing, the City 0 Coon Rapids petitioned to annex part of Grow Township to the City of Coon Rapids. (The area Coon Rapids petttioned to annex is Coon Creek, west to County Road #9 and north to Bunker Lake Blvd.) In this petition, Coon Rapids stated that they c uld give the residents in this area better services in regards to sewer, water and s reets, etc., Chairman Schneider stated that Grow can give these same ----\ services if the people want them and want to pay for them. ~----- Chairman Sc neider then gave the residents in the Crooked Lake area some background information on Grow interceptor sewer system which the Metro Sewer Board bought and stated that it is Grow's responsibility to put in the internal sewer system. Chairman Sc neider opened the meeting to questions from the residents in the Crooked Lake area. Donald Wick asked the Board if Coon Rapids can petition to annex without the people in this are wanting it? Supervisor hristenson explained that one of the major risks in an unincorporated town such a Grow petitioning for incorporation is that an incorporated community continuous o it can come in and take the whole thing or a piece of it, depending upon what t e Municipal Commission decides in the testimony and that is what is happening w th Coon Rapids and Anoka, they are interested in pieces of Grow Township. Ron Anpt as ed the Board what the advantage or disadvantage would be if they were annexed to oon Rapids? Chairman Sc neider stated that the disadvantage would be about ten (10) mills difference n their tax dollar because Coon Rapids has bonded indebtedness of $21,595,000 and Grow To'~ship has no bonded indebtedness. Supervisor hristenson stated that the advantage would be an establi~ice, and ~ fire depart , \ ent and city water and they would have the advantage of ng these . services wh ch Grow cannot until it grow's up. /, ~ ,/""'-. () I' . c '- "-~ '--./ Minutes - une 20, 1974 Page 2 /"", ~ A gent lema , from the audience asked the Board how they could stop the petition and also if the residents in the Crooked Lake area started another petition to stay in Gr1w, would that help? Planning a d Zoning Chairman Allan Miles stated to the residents and the Board that be for the Municipal Commission receives as evidence a formal petition, they have to ha e a filing fee of $200 for handling. ¡upervisor Christenson stated that the residents in the Crooked Lake area could write to t eMunicipa1 Commission individually or collectively. There were many questions from these residents and the majority stated thay wanted to stay in Grow Township. The Crooke Lake meeting ended at 9:00 p.m., Chairman Schneider opened the meeting to the res dents in Grow that the City of Anoka has petitioned to annex. I Chairman Sc hneider explained to these residents that a year ago, the City of Anoka proposed to square off their boundary by annexing 445 acres in Grow Township, Section /130. Supervisor Christenson pointed out this area on the map to these residents. A gentleman from the audience asked the Board when Grow Township becomes incorporated, wou 1d being incorporated provide more? /""'-. Supervisor hristenson stated that when Grow becomes the City of Andover, it will ,---,' have a grea er capability of supplying street lighting, additional revenue from state aid a d ~ ~. l .. do more things more explicitly or more ext9Qsive1y. I A gentleman ~ I from the audience stated to the Board that the gentleman who has the proposed tr i1er park in this area, signed this petition to go to the City of Anoka , , because he tated that the trailer park could get going quicker and asked the Board I if this was true? Supervisor hristenson stated there is no zøning for this trailer park, it is mandate from the Su eeme Court that Grow has to grant this Special Use Permit for a trailer park. Supe visor Christenson also stated that the Mobile Home Ordinance requires municipal s wer hook-up be available in the building of a Mobile Home Park. Mr. Hugh Sc oephoerster, a resident in Section #30 that Anoka has petitioned to annex, requ sted that the Board write to Attorney Beens and ask if the zoning would change if t is section of Grow is annexed to the City of Anoka, or if the City of Anoka would have to honor the Supreme Courts decision and grant Mr. Hay a mobile home park. The Board directed the Deputy Clerk to write this letter to Attorney Beens. ( A copy of this letter and Attorney Beens response is attached to these set of minu es.) The Board s ggested that these residents write letters individually or collectively to the Minn sota Munic~pa1 Commission, 304 Capitol Square, St. Paul, Minnesota and aske to hav their names withdrawn from thË petition. ,--, , , No 'further uestions, Chairman Schneider made a motion to adjourn; second by , / Supervisor hristenson. Passed. Meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m. I ~ f'-. r---. . I, , ,~ ~' Minutes - June 20, 1974 Page 3 ~, ~ / ,~ .'...-/ ,~ , . , - / i I I i /"'., c: /'. - '-..../ . G3.-()W TC)wn§hip -~ 1685 CROSSTOWN BLVD. N.W. ANÓkA. IVIINNESd'tA 55303 ~ (612) 755·5100 June 21, 19 4 Mr. Richard Beens 118 East Main Street )- Anoka, Minntsota 55303 Dear Mr. Beens: This letter is in response to an inquiry from a resident of Grow Township, Mr. Hugh Sc oephoerster who asked the following: 1) If a portion of Grow Township is annexed to the City of Anoka, does the City of Anoka have the legal right to change the Zoning to their jatisfaction or are they required by law to allow Zoning to remain as is or was in Grow Township. ' 2) Th~ decision was made by the Supr~me Court to allow a Mobile Home ~ Park i~ Grow Township. If the area i~ question becomes part of the City of Ana a, through annexation, would the City of Anoks be obligated to Ir ~ I honor t e Supreme Courts decision or would the City of Anoka have the I authority to change the Zoning and refuse the construction of a Mobile Home Pa k. Mr. Hugh Sch ephoerster also requested to have you verify the above with the Attorney Gen Office. Your prompt eply to this matter is very much appreciated. Sincerely, ~~' ?17. Marilyn Kapp lhoff, Deputy Clerk ^ mk CC: Richard Schneider Marvin hristenson Winslow Holasek Art Jaw rski.--- Allan M les Hugh Sc oephoerster .~, ~, / ,~ () ~ " - , ~ - ~ , . - , ' , G·...¡..· , ;i .~" "--,,. -".. '.., . '.. ,~.~ i ~"'" h· .::J?_ 7"¿' , ~ BABCOCK. LOCHER, NEILSON & MANNEi.LÄ---'i1?i:../.~- -...,.... -- ATTORNEYS ",,'J: LAW :1.1. ."'So¡' MAIN 8TR..'I' ANOKAt MINNBSOTA 56803 EDMUND P. nADCOCK TEL. 4:U·151G~ ~_·"~-"i -.-.. JAMES M. NEiLSON FELIX A. MANNSLL JOliN R. SPl<~^U:MAN RICIIARD DEENS RODJ~nT F. MANNBL JOliN M. D'URI{E \ WILLIAM O. lIAWKIN~ RONALD B. PETERSON JAM D. HALVBS80M I June 26, 1974 Ms. Marilyn !'PP6lhOff' Deputy Clerk Grow Townshi. 1685 crossto n Boulevard N. W. Anoka, Minneåota 55303 I Dear Ms. KaPrelhoff: Thank you for your letter of June 21, 1974. It is extremely difficult to give hardland fast answers to Mr. Schoephoerster's questions. lIow- ~ ever, there re a few general guidelines that might be of assistance. '~ F' .~ f 1 d ' , d' ~rst:, a un~ 0 government may a ways amen ~ ts zon~ng or ~nance classificati n districts, so long as the amendment is shown to be in the best int rests of the public health, safety, and welfare. However, the unit of lovernment may not act in an arbitrary or capricious manner. There must b a demonstrable, objective finding that the amendment is in the best nterests, of the public. Secondly, an owner of vacant property has no "vested" right to a par- ticular zoni g classification. However, his right may become vested once he make a substantial expenditure in reliance on a particular classificati n. For instance, certain parcels of property in Grow Town- ship are presently zoned for mobile home parks. Since no construction has begun, t e owners of these properties have no vested right to mobile home park zoning. However, the Town Board could not change this zoning on a mere whi . There would have to be a factual showing that the zoning change was in the best interests of the pUblic health, safety and wel- fare. If the property owners were to commence construction of their parks and spe d substantial sums in reliance on the mobile home park zoning, their right to that zoning would in all liklihood become vested. The Town Boar could not then change the zoning any further. If a portion Township were annexed to the City of Anoka, the I included land would initially retain their present zoning. However, 'J: ~"" i at some later date, the city factually found that a zoning change would I (\ \...../ be in the bes interests of the public health, safety and welfare, they could change that zoning classification. As you can sel, the guidelinæapplicable to zoning changes are very general and sbmewhat nebulous. I am sure this ,is intentional on the part of the Minnesota Supreme court, since zoning decisions require an \ , I '" ."-'. ~ . - { '--./ " ~ " , , Jùne 26, 197f ~ Mo. Mar"yn raPPelhOff Page - 2 - extremely delicate balance between public interests and private property rights. Inflexible rules could so easily lead to grave injustices. I . In preparation of this response, I have not contacted the Attorney Generals office. They will not render formal opinions in the absence of a specifib cònflict. Further, Attorney Generals opinions as applied to local govèrnment units are only advisory. By law, only school districts ar~ bound to follow Attorney Generals opinions in the absence of specific 'egislatiop or Supreme court Decisions. If Dr. sChoeþhoerster has any further specific questions, you might ask him to call me at my office. I would be glad to discuss this matter with him further. I [ yours, .~ -....,/ I R!chard Been RB/mb . C.C. : Rich rd Schneider Marv'n Christenson Wins ow Holasek Art aworski AlIa Miles High Schoephoerster I \~' ..-.. - _u__ ..__._ _