Agenda Packets - 2005/09/26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council August 22, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 12 Ms. Haake stated residents elected the Council and it puts the Council in a tough spot. She noted 1 that the attorney may say if Mounds View doesn’t go through with it then Medtronic will sue us. 2 But she thinks Medtronic cares for their public image and does not want their name “blackened.” 3 She stated if Medtronic feels they have done the right thing by Mounds View and been a 4 wonderful neighbor, then residents will know that. She stated they are just asking for a vote and 5 more information. They believe the City needs to go through the contract more thoroughly 6 because residents do not believe all of the terms are fair to the City. They want to be of help to 7 the Council and future generations. She stated that Medtronic is a great company and she would 8 agree with $235,000 an acre and an 8-year TIF District. 9 10 Director Ericson explained that with zoning there is often a time when you need to interpret the 11 Zoning Code and he stands by the fact that an office type of use is a consistent use within the I-1 12 zoning district. Otherwise the City will need to kick out a number of its office uses within the 13 City. He stated that the project planned will have to go through a Planned Unit Development 14 (PUD) on the site which, in essence, is a rezoning consistent with the anticipated use of 820,000 15 square feet of office. 16 17 Brian Amundsen, 3048 Woodale Drive, asked if there has been any language added or stricken 18 from the final terms of the contract since the July 11 version. City Attorney Riggs stated not as 19 to terms decided by the Council but as to semantics and to make all provisions work together. 20 He stated he could outline those semantic changes, if desired. 21 22 Mr. Amundsen asked if all changes were purely semantically. City Attorney Riggs answered in 23 the affirmative and stated the contract is consistent with what the EDA and Council adopted. If 24 there is to be a change in terms, an amendment would be needed and it would have to come back. 25 26 Mr. Amundsen asked about the status of the street project and whether any projects would be 27 occurring in 2006. He stated he feels some obligation to come back to his neighbors, maybe in 28 the form of a petition, about street improvements. He asked if the City is still moving forward 29 with Option 3. 30 31 Public Works Director Lee advised that at this point the City is not planning a street project in 32 2006 because there is no time to put together the plans and specifications and go through the 33 public hearing. The City does have plans for the area that Mr. Amundsen lives in and the City 34 could go with that since a public hearing was held for that area. Staff is now evaluating the 35 streets and updating the pavement condition index. That data will be used to determine which 36 area to next consider. 37 38 Councilmember Thomas stated this issue was discussed at a Council worksession as well as what 39 streets really need to be done. She explained this involves building a project from scratch and it 40 needs to be defended what project should be done first. 41 42 Mary Scotch, 7806 Gloria Circle, stated she knows Councilmember Gunn worked very hard on 43 the Festival in the Park but she wants to address the fact of looking at the deal because the 44 bottom line is that the golf course is the only asset residents have. She stated she has been asking 45