Minutes - 2005/05/23 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council May 23, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 8 • Land Use Plan to get a -good view of where they want the Community to go and to then bring the zoning ordinance into compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. He expressed concerns stating that this is the first time he has seen a zoning ordinance guide the Comprehensive Plan and asked if they could do a moratorium or place a hold on this. County Representative stated that the City Council does have the option but there are restrictions in place from the legislation. He explained that if an inner ordinance is adopted the City could call a moratorium to conduct the study. Mr. McCarty urged the Council to do this and give the City a chance to breath. Bob Glazer expressed concerns about the stormwater runoff and asked if the excess quota generated would relate back in any way to the street and gutter improvement project. Mayor Marty acknowledged Mr. Glazer's concerns stating that to his knowledge he does not believe that it relates back. Mr. Glazer asked how the City plans to take care of the water management plan with the proposed project. He explained that the golf course was installed as a way and means of helping to manage the water runoff in this area. City Administrator Ulrich explained that they have not gotten into that level of detail yet noting • that the Watershed would dictate the stormwater management process. He further explained that the runoff would have to be rerouted and ponded, onsite, in different locations. He stated that this has not been worked out yet from an engineering perspective. Barbara Haake noted that on January 19, 2005 the land use amendment was first introduced. She noted that it states that a public hearing was to be scheduled for February 2, 2005 and asked for clarification on the exact wording the Planning Commission gave as their recommendation to City Council on what the zoning would be. Director Ericson reviewed the Planning Commission's motion with Council stating that it concludes that The Bridges site should bear future land use designation of OFC. He further clarified that when it states re-development it is because the golf course is already a developed property. Ms. Haake stated that she wants to be sure that the billboards are consistent noting that they could have removed the whole bottom portion of the parcel where billboards are located and subdivide. City Attorney Riggs explained that the proposal was for six billboards across the property and slicing off a portion of continuing use land would have been very difficult to do. • Director Ericson explained that the reference to MnDOT is because they are the permitting agency and they are the ones that control. the Federal Highway Beautification Act.