Agenda Packets - 2005/08/22 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council July 11, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 17 Charter that citizens have a right to address issues before the Council. He stated that he is 1 unaware of any communication with the City of Blaine, particularly with the fact that they are 2 going to lose some revenue producing properties to be turned into a parking lot. He asked what 3 Blaine’s reaction was to the changes in the Comprehensive Plan for Mounds View and asked if 4 they reviewed the changes or did they respond to the City Council or Tom Ryan. 5 6 Director Ericson confirmed that the City of Blaine supported the City of Mounds View’s request 7 to change the future land use to office. 8 9 Mr. McCarty asked if they support it knowing that a portion of their industrial land would be 10 taken away. He stated that he didn’t know it until the last minute noting that the first map he saw 11 was in relationship to the property in Mounds View. He asked if the City of Blaine knew, at the 12 time of their approval, that the impact from the development would extend beyond Mounds 13 View’s border to the extent of removing tax producing buildings and properties from their City. 14 He asked if they were aware of this at the time and did they make specific approval to that 15 condition. 16 17 Director Ericson stated that the City of Blaine was aware of that activity and the potential for 18 redevelopment within their own community. He stated that these are two separate issues noting 19 that Blaine was aware of it and they did support the Comprehensive Plan amendment and the 20 proposed development. 21 22 Mr. McCarty indicated that he is not against this adding that the Council should be commended 23 for the investments they have made in the parks system. He indicated that the City has spent over 24 $500,000 in parks improvements and that he applauds them for their investment and hard work 25 with the parks system but he does not understand how members of this City Council can 26 constantly bang the drum that the City is putting $40,000 a year into a golf course that is about to 27 be removed and yet at the same time vote in over $231,000, since 2001, for the North Suburban 28 Tourist Bureau. He stated that it is a little difficult to understand when the Council is approving 29 $57,000 per year for the North Suburban Tourist Bureau and then whine about $40,000 for a 30 good recreational facility, such as the golf course, that serves everyone from the developmentally 31 disabled to the hearing impaired and senior citizens. He stated that he is having a hard time 32 understanding this. He stated that he doesn’t care where the money comes from it is still the 33 citizen’s money, no matter where it comes from. 34 35 Economic Development Coordinator Backman clarified that the money that go to the CPB are 36 based on a 3-percent lodging tax noting that there are very specific uses for those monies. 37 38 Barbara Haake, 3024 County Road I, referenced the Comprehensive Land Use Amendment and 39 asked if there was specific zoning that the City was required to put in place by the courts in order 40 to be able to place the billboards. 41 42 City Attorney Riggs stated that he does not see a direct tie and explained that the property, based 43 on what the court said, had to match the use that was actually being made. He further explained 44 that the public facility zoning was not consistent with the business-type setting and that was the 45