Laserfiche WebLink
uNAppRovED <br /> Page 5 <br /> • September 22, 1997 <br /> Mounds View City Council <br /> 1 MOTION/SECOND: Koopmeiners/Stigney to approve Resolution No. 5163,Approving the Refinancing of <br /> 2 the 1991 Fire Bonds. <br /> 3 <br /> 4 VOTE: 4 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried <br /> 5 <br /> 6 <br /> 7 C.(1) Consideration of Interim Ordinance that Excludes Granting Any New Residential Building <br /> 8 Permits in the Highway 10 Corridor. <br /> 9 <br /> 10 Council member Stigney explained that this is a result of many resident's requests to not have any more housing <br /> 11 on Highway 10. An initiative is being circulated to put this on the ballot,or a referendum to change some of <br /> 12 the residential zoning on Highway 10 to business use. Mr.Stigney stated he feels it would be considerate for <br /> 13 the Council to consider adopting an interim ordinance of this type until such time as the council can consider <br /> 14 some of the requests of the residents. <br /> 15 <br /> 16 Attorney Long noted that there is a provision in the statutes in Chapter 462 that allows for an interim ordinance <br /> 17 to be adopted by the City Council that would place a moratorium on certain types of uses as long as it is done in <br /> 18 conjunction with a valid zoning study. If this were to take place,the Planning Commission would need to <br /> 19 consider it,and hold a public hearing. An ordinance would need to be drafted. <br /> 20 <br /> • 21 Mayor McCarty noted that the City currently has at least one P.U.D.in process on County Road I and Silver <br /> 22 Lake Road. He wondered how this may be impacted. <br /> 23 <br /> 24 Attorney Long noted that it could potentially be affected. The Council could develop an ordinance,however <br /> 25 that would only apply perspectively. <br /> 26 <br /> 27 Mayor McCarty noted that this type of Ordinance would put things on hold for up to one year. He wondered if <br /> 28 this would be a positive move as there are a number of residents who are against rezoning the property to <br /> 29 business use. <br /> 30 <br /> 31 MOTION by Stigney to direct staff to prepare an Interim Ordinance that Excludes Granting Any New <br /> 32 Residential Building Permits in the Highway 10 Corridor. MOTION FAILS FOR LACK OF SECOND. <br /> 33 <br /> 34 C. Consideration of Resolution No.5154,a Resolution Approving the Development Review Request of <br /> 35 MSP Real Estate for the Properties Located at 2637-2665 Highway 10. <br /> 36 <br /> 37 Mr.Ericson explained that MSP Real Estate is requesting approval of a revised Development Review for the <br /> 38 Silver Lake Commons Project. He provided a brief summary of the project. Mr.Ericson noted changes that <br /> 39 had made to the Resolution since the last council meeting. It was noted that the applicant has met all <br /> 40 ordinance requirements. <br /> 41 <br /> 42 MOTION by Stigney to postpone Consideration of Resolution No.5154,until the referendum issue is <br /> 43 resolved. <br /> 44 <br /> 45 Mary Amirahmadi,8330 Eastwood Road,stated she believed the petition for an initiative for rezoning and the <br /> 4) 46 petition for the referendum could be completed by the next Council Meeting on October 13, 1997. <br /> 47 <br /> 48 MOTION FAILS FOR LACK OF SECOND. <br />