Agenda Packets - 2003/07/14 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council June 23, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 16 1 Council Member Stigney indicated he understood that it was when the license holder came up for 2 renewal that the City wanted to change the district. He then suggested that the City take a 3 broader approach and create the district not only for pawnshops but for related businesses as 4 well. 5 6 There was consent on the $10,000 fee and to look at an overlay district. 7 8 Mayor Linke indicated he would go with the south side. 9 10 Richard Sonterre of 5060 Red Oak Drive thanked Council for its interest in the overlay district 11 and said that his understanding of the situation is that the reason there was an issue is because 12 they singled out a specific type of business and it ran akin to spot zoning. He then said he would 13 support the area to the north of Highway 10 because there are no residential structures, no 14 churches and no schools in the area. He further commented that he did not think there was 15 another geographical location in the City that would provide this type of separation. 16 17 Council Member Marty indicated that is why he would prefer the north side. 18 19 Council Member Gunn asked if there is buildable space in the area. 20 21 Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated there was not but noted there is rentable space in 22 the area. 23 24 J. Consideration of a Development Review Request for LandCor Development 25 26 Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated that this item is on the agenda as it failed on a two 27 to two vote at the last meeting. He then said that the PUD was successfully amended to allow for 28 this type of use and all of the requirements have been met. He also indicated that while the 29 Planning Commission would have preferred to have a restaurant on that location the market has 30 proven that the site is not suitable for that and they are supportive of this plan. 31 32 Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated that at the last meeting Resolution 6033 failed on a 33 vote of two to two so no action was taken and Staff brings this before Council for consideration 34 and recommends approval of the project. He then indicated that a representative of LandCor 35 Development was in attendance to answer any questions. 36 37 Audie Tarpley from LandCor Development addressed Council and asked for approval of the 38 development review for the projects. He then said that they have met all the requirements 39 including setbacks and adhered pretty strictly to the principals of the PUD. He further 40 commented that they have two signed tenants for the office building and one is an investment 41 company and the other is a chiropractor. 42 43