My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-07-2000
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2000
>
06-07-2000
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/28/2018 8:30:27 AM
Creation date
8/28/2018 8:30:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Minutes
GOVBOARD
Planning Commission
DOCTYPE
minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
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
Mounds View Planning Commission June 7, 2000 <br />Regular Meeting Page 20 <br /> <br /> <br />Mr. Peterson inquired regarding the value of the Midland Videen property. Commissioner <br />Johnson advised that developable property fronting Highway 10 was worth between $8 and $10 <br />per square-foot. Mr. Peterson inquired what this particular property was worth with only 3.5 <br />acres of developable land, and how this compared to the value of the City property. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson advised that there was a storm water pond located in the middle of the <br />City-owned parcel. Mr. Peterson stated that the pond would be removed. Chairperson Peterson <br />explained that with the pond in the middle of the parcel, it was not worth anything as commercial <br />property, because the pond must be relocated if the land is to be used, and there was no place to <br />relocate the pond unless the Midland Videen property was involved. Commissioner Johnson <br />commented that this was probably the best proposal the City would see on this site, in terms of <br />preserving the green space and other factors. <br /> <br />Mr. Peterson stated that this development would break up the continuity of the area. He <br />explained that this commercial development was proposed to be located in the middle of the City <br />Hall/ Community Center campus area. Commissioner Johnson stated that this was correct, <br />however, this developer was willing to work with the City in terms of a design, which is <br />consistent with the surrounding features. <br /> <br />Mr. Peterson stated that the previous year, a questionnaire was sent out to the residents to <br />determine what should be done with the City parcel, and in his understanding, there was a very <br />minimal response, however, the majority of those who responded indicated they felt this land <br />should be held in reserve. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Jopke stated that staff has met with an appraiser to obtain an <br />appraisal of both the City parcel and the Outlot, and they anticipate that by the end of the month, <br />further information should be available in this regard. <br /> <br />Chairperson Peterson inquired where in relationship to the wetland boundary the Midland <br />Videen property development could occur, if it were to be developed independently of the City <br />remnant parcel. Commissioner Kaden indicated it would abut the residential property. <br /> <br />Planning Associate Ericson stated that the Midland Videen parcel is 9.4 acres in total, of which <br />approximately 5 acres is upland. He advised that there were ways to reconfigure the wetland, <br />and if the wetland was all shifted to one side, with the consent of the Rice Creek Watershed <br />District, additional areas to the rear could be mitigated or combined with the uplands to create a <br />more feasible development scenario. He commented that this was a possibility, although it was <br />not anything that the City would like to see. <br /> <br />Planning Associate Ericson stated that site could be developed, and as all were aware, such <br />acreage on Highway 10 in such close proximity to the Twin Cities simply does not exist, and <br />they are presently seeing development on what was previously considered to be undevelopable <br />land. He pointed out that properties that were marginal, at best, were now being developed. He <br />stated that a couple of houses were currently being constructed in the City on properties that no
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.