Any preliminary plat/final plat and/or development deemed premature pursuant to the criteria listed below shall be denied by the council.
A. Lack Of Adequate Drainage: A condition of inadequate drainage shall be deemed to exist if:
1. Surface or subsurface water retention and runoff is such that it constitutes a danger to the structural security of the proposed structures.
2. The proposed subdivision will cause pollution of water sources or damage from erosion and situation on downhill or downstream land.
3. The proposed site grading and development will cause harmful and irreparable damage from erosion and situation on downhill or downstream land.
4. Factors to be considered in making these determinations may include: average rainfall for the area; the relation of the land to floodplains; the nature of soils and subsoils and their ability to adequately support surface water runoff and waste disposal systems; the slope of the land and its effect on effluents; and the presence of streams as related to effluent disposal.
B. Lack Of Adequate Water Supply: A proposed subdivision shall be deemed to lack an adequate water supply if the proposed subdivision does not have adequate sources of water to serve the proposed subdivision if developed to its maximum permissible density without causing an unreasonable depreciation of existing water supplies for surrounding areas.
C. Lack Of Adequate Roads Or Highways To Serve The Subdivision: A proposed subdivision shall be deemed to lack adequate roads or highways to serve the subdivision when:
1. Roads which serve the proposed subdivision are of such a width, grade, stability, vertical and horizontal alignment, site distance and surface condition that an increase in traffic volume generated by the proposed subdivision would create a hazard to public safety and general welfare, or seriously aggravate an already hazardous condition, and when, with due regard to the advice of the county and/or the Mn-DOT, said roads are inadequate for the intended use.
2. The traffic volume generated by the proposed subdivision would create unreasonable highway congestion or unsafe conditions on highways existing at the time of the application or proposed for completion within the next two (2) years.
D. Lack Of Adequate Waste Disposal Systems: A proposed subdivision shall be deemed to lack adequate waste disposal systems if in subdivisions for which sewer lines are proposed, there is inadequate sewer capacity in the present system to support the subdivision if developed to its maximum permissible density after reasonable sewer capacity is reserved for schools, planned public facilities, and commercial and industrial development projected for the next five (5) years; or if in subdivisions where sewer lines are neither available nor proposed, there is inadequate on site sewer capacity potential to support the subdivision if developed to the maximum permissible density indicated in the Rosemount comprehensive plan, as may be amended.
E. Inconsistency With Comprehensive Plan: A proposed subdivision shall be deemed inconsistent with the city's comprehensive plan when the subdivision is inconsistent with the purposes, objectives and recommendations of the adopted comprehensive plan of Rosemount, as may be amended. Subdivisions which do not follow planned public improvements shall be deemed inconsistent with the city's growth strategies as outlined in the comprehensive plan.
F. Public Service Capacity: A proposed subdivision shall be determined to lack necessary public service capacity when services such as recreational facilities, schools, police and fire protection and other public facilities, which must be provided at public expense, cannot reasonably be provided for within the next two (2) years.
G. Minnesota Environmental Quality Commission (EQB) Policies: The proposed subdivision is inconsistent with the policies of the environmental quality board, as may be amended, and could adversely impact critical environmental areas or potentially disrupt or destroy historic areas, which are designated or officially recognized by the council, in violation of federal and state historical preservation laws.
H. Inconsistency With Capital Improvement Plan: A proposed subdivision shall be deemed inconsistent with capital improvement plans when improvements and/or services necessary to accommodate the proposed subdivision have not been programmed in the Rosemount, county or other regional capital improvement plans. The council may waive this criteria when it can be demonstrated that a revision to capital improvement programs can be accommodated. (Ord. B-91, 8-5-1997, eff. 8-11-1997)
Next Doc