06-07-2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View Planning Commission June 7, 2000 Regular Meeting Page 25 Mr. Cunningham suggested the land might be dedicated to the Park District as a park, as it would likely be much more difficult to sell a park. Planning Associate Ericson stated that the entire City Hall campus area is considered a park. He advised that the City has powers of condemnation and eminent domain, therefore, if the City desires to do something, it will. Community Development Director Jopke stated that staff would consult with the City Attorney to determine what alternatives exist, and report this information to the Planning Commission and the City Council. Commissioner Laube stated that a covenant would not ensure that the land would not be developed, however, it would be more difficult to do, it would cost money, and the citizens would have to be notified. He pointed out that the Planning Commission does not have the final say in this matter, as the City Council could always overrule their recommendation. Mr. Faracy commented that given the number of residents present, the concerns might not be as great as they appear. He stated that if something could be done to make the future development of this land more difficult at minimum, it would definitely make this proposal more acceptable to the residents in the area. Chairperson Peterson stated that it was very clear in the discussions that a covenant approach or other legal method to deal with this would be desirable, and he would not anticipate any argument with the current City Council in this regard. He pointed out however, if this development was to move forward, the remaining land would primarily be wetland and a highland strip behind the wetland, and that wetland could not be eliminated. He stated that at best, the wetland would have to be mitigated at a 2 to 1 ration, therefore, if you attempted to eliminate it, you would actually have to create more of it, and the question at that point would be where to put it. Commissioner Johnson stated that the wetland would have to be mitigated on the subject property, and it was previously discussed that the mitigation would occur in the developable area of the residential development north of City Hall. He added that this was where the wetland credits would come into play, which would almost ensure that this area could not be developed. Chairperson Peterson stated that ultimately, this may be the strongest argument, in that this would not only be a natural area that was desirable to preserve as such, but it would also be wetland, making it nearly impossible to do anything else with it. Commissioner Thomas inquired what type of notification had been provided to the residents of the townhouse complex at Landmark Estates, with regard to this development process.