Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developer seeks MUSA amendment for High Point Crossing; sewer capacity stalls decision
Summary
A developer seeking to bring High Point Crossing into the Metropolitan Urban Service Area to serve a 65‑lot open‑space development presented alternatives after state sewer‑capacity concerns; council signaled interest in an 11‑lot rural option while staff recommended waiting for Metropolitan Council modeling.
The council on Oct. 21 received an update on a proposed comprehensive plan amendment and Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) request for the High Point Crossing development, a roughly 78‑acre site previously approved in concept as a 65‑unit open‑space planned unit development.
Planning staff and the developer explained that additional due diligence ruled out a planned community septic system because of soil and hydraulic connectivity test results. The developer applied for a MUSA amendment so the project could connect to city sewer. Planning staff said the Metropolitan Council and the city must confirm sewer capacity before the council can make a final decision on adding the property to the MUSA; staff asked for and received a 90‑day extension of the decision deadline to Jan. 23, 2026.
The developer presented two rural alternatives that would avoid immediate sewer extension: a 30‑lot plan with 1.5‑acre minimum lots and public water and roadwork, and an 11‑lot concept with larger lots, private drives and limited infrastructure. The developer said the 11‑lot rural concept was simpler and preferred if city sewer is not available. Staff noted design exceptions would be necessary for either rural alternative and cautioned these would require thorough vetting before acceptance of an application.
Councilmembers voiced differing views. Several members said they preferred to wait for Metropolitan Council sewer modeling before approving a comp‑plan amendment into the MUSA; others said they were sympathetic to the developer and expressed willingness to explore the 11‑lot rural option. One councilmember favored proceeding with an 11‑lot concept rather than waiting uncertainly for regional capacity improvements that could take multiple years.
Planning staff said the sewer capacity issue is unresolved: the city is reviewing capacity downstream where flows enter the Met Council system, and while Met Council staff had been contacted earlier, no firm timeline for modeling or capacity improvements was available. Staff recommended no action tonight and suggested returning when the sewer capacity analysis is complete.
Council provided advisory feedback but took no final action. Staff said they will continue coordination with the Met Council, and the developer indicated willingness to pursue the 11‑lot rural alternative if the MUSA amendment cannot be approved.
Votes at a glance: no binding vote taken; council provided advisory comments and supported staff follow up and a workshop discussion if needed.
