02-25-2004 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINU'T'ES CITY COUNCIL FEI3RUARY 25, 2004 to make a decision, it may not be able to stop those marketing efforts. Anderson indicated, however, that he was comfortable with waiting for two weeks. Anderson pointed out that Family Academy has received the City Admiuistrator'srepnrt, and noted that the Administrator has done a good job in highlighting the areas of concern that staff has. Fahey instructed staff to place this matter on the agenda for the March 12°i meeting. RAMSEY Council reviewed the City Administrator's report dated February 20th COUNTY relative to the County's solicitation of potential sites for the location of a COURT suburban court facility. Fahey agreed with the Administrator's position FACILITY that a court facility in Little Canada would not be advantageous for the City given the loss of additional property from the tax rolls. The Administrator indicated that the County is soliciting any city interest in a suburban court location. Little Canada has been mentioned as a great site for a court given the County owns the land at Rice Street and Country Drive. While this property is currently off the tax trolls, development of a suburban court would preclude any potential for the sale of the property to a taxpaying entity. Anderson felt it unfair for the County to take out a commercial business from this site and develop it as a court site while selling the property it owns across the street iu the City of Shoreview for a commercial development. Anderson suggested that the Council and staff lobby the County Commissioners on this issue. Fahey pointed out that Little Canada is a small city and should not bear the bw den of a suburban court facility. Given Little Canada's size, the impact is greater than it would be to a la~~ger city. Fahey felt a suburban court should be located on the County's property in Shoreview. The City Administrator indicated that his understanding is most cities will not be stepping forward expressing interest in having the court facility. The Council asked about the PUD zoning of the County property in Little Canada. The Planner indicated that the intention of the PUD Zoning is to allow apublic-regulated utility building such as a public works garage or lift stations. The Planner stated that his interpretation would be that a court facility is not an allowed use. Given that there appeared to be some ambiguity with the specific wording, the Council felt that the Planner should review it and make a recommendation for clarifying the intent. 12