Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council August 8, 2005 <br />Regular Meeting Page 10 <br />• Mr. Jahnke stated that if the residents would sit down and really look at the funds the City has <br />received from all of this they would understand that no other developer would have been able to <br />help this City with projects like the County Road J improvement project. He stated that the City <br />was able to do this project because of Medtronic and they never say anything about that. He <br />stated that the City got plenty for this land for what Medtronic got for the City. <br />Mayor Marty asked if the Council feels that the development should be brought back for <br />discussion at a work session. <br />Council Member Thomas stated that she does not think it is necessary. <br />Council Member Flaherty~stated that Council should discuss this further. He stated that he would <br />like to review the plan further before they start developing the land. <br />Council Member Gunn asked if they have new information that should be reviewed. <br />Director Ericson stated that there is no new information at this point noting that Staff would <br />provide Council with updates if they do receive any changes. He stated that this is not a project <br />that would be heard by the Planning Commission or the City Council noting that it would not be <br />rezoned or go into a PUD. He agreed that Mr. Morgan brings up a point that the City could <br />consider condemning the property but it would involve spending millions of dollars to acquire <br />• the land. <br />City Administrator Ulrich clarified that Mr. Morgan is asking the City to purchase the existing <br />units or purchase the land for the 66 units or both. He stated that his answer would dictate <br />whether it should be discussed at a work session. <br />Mr. Morgan stated that he does want due diligence from the City relative to the building permits. <br />He stated that he wants it to follow normal protocol. He stated that the court order did not say <br />that it could not be a PUD, that it shouldn't go through the Planning Commission or that it <br />should not be reviewed by City Council. He stated that this is the responsibility of the City to <br />follow the normal protocol and do the right thing to protect the problems the City has <br />experienced in the past. He stated that it has been 30-years noting that he thinks they, as owners, <br />take an extreme risk. He stated that it is his understanding that the court order states that the <br />developer has to build 66 units. He stated that just because the developer doesn't want to, he <br />doesn't get that vote. He stated that they sit on peat moss and there are structural problems. He <br />explained that this has nothing to do with the Watershed adding that the Watershed has told them <br />that this is a City issue. He stated that the warranty comes from the builder. He expressed <br />concerns stating that the homeowners bear the costs and the condemnation would give him a fair <br />market price for his property and it would get him out of the responsibility of bearing those <br />dollars. <br />• City Administrator Ulrich stated that Staff could take a look at condemning the existing six units <br />on the property noting that generally the City relies on a slum and blight finding, which he <br />