My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2004/01/05
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2004
>
Agenda Packets - 2004/01/05
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:45:45 PM
Creation date
8/8/2018 8:53:26 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
1/5/2004
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
1/5/2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
91
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Item No: 9 <br />Meeting Date: Jan 5, 2004 <br />Type of Business: Worksession <br />Administrator Review : _______ <br />City of Mounds View Staff Report <br />To: Honorable Mayor and City Council <br />From: Jim Ericson, Community Development Director <br />Item Title/Subject: Review Conditions Associated With Resolution 5527 <br />and Discuss Potential Code Amendments <br /> <br />Background: <br /> <br />On February 26, 2001, the City Council approved Resolution 5527, a resolution authorizing <br />the development of a small commercial parcel at the southwest corner of County Road I and <br />Greenfield Avenue. The original approval allowed for a two-level office building with a 2,004 <br />square foot foundation at 2402 County Road I. While modifications and amendments were <br />requested and approved for the development, what was ultimately constructed was a two- <br />level office building with a 2,004 square foot foundation as originally intended. <br /> <br />Discussion <br /> <br />One of the original conditions of the approval was that the garbage was to be stored inside <br />the building. This was not a condition that the Commission or the Council necessarily <br />desired, the property owner at the time—Tony Mezzenga—indicated that it was his <br />preference to keep the garbage inside. Given the limited greenspace on the site, the <br />Commission and Council agreed and added the condition to the resolution. <br /> <br />After the building was constructed, the property was sold to Mr. Stephen Farrell. Mr. Farrell <br />had been unaware of the garbage provision even though it was clearly called out in the <br />original resolution of approval. Mr. Farrell indicated that even if he wanted to keep the <br />garbage inside, he could not as there was not sufficient room or space to do so. Mr. Farrell <br />petitioned the City Council to have the condition removed and on July 14, 2003, the Council <br />unanimously approved a motion to uphold the condition. <br /> <br />Following the Council action, correspondence took place between this office and Mr. Farrell <br />regarding the garbage issue and after repeated requests for compliance, a Ramsey County <br />Court Citation was issued in Mr. Farrell’s name. The matter was before the Court on <br />November 18, 2003 and the charge was dismissed so long as there was no reoccurrence of <br />the violation. Two weeks later staff notified the prosecuting attorney Tom Hughes that the <br />garbage cans remained outside in violation of the court order and Res. 5527. It was at this <br />point staff was advised that the City could not seek resolution through a criminal procedure, <br />as the City Code does not prohibit garbage cans outside. Furthermore, the attorney advised <br />that our Code did not have any language that would identify a violation of a development <br />review resolution as a misdemeanor and, additionally, any violations of development <br />agreements entered into by the City could neither be pursued criminally. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.