My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Minutes - 2005/08/22
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
Minutes - 2005/08/22
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/5/2025 4:19:26 PM
Creation date
3/5/2025 4:19:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Minutes
MEETINGDATE
8/22/2005
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
51
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 City Council August 22, 2005 <br />Regular Meeting Page 20 <br />• explained there is some flexibility as to when it will occur but it will occur as a result of the PUD <br />application since it is a rezoning from the Industrial zoning to a PUD. In doing a PUD, it gives <br />the City greater flexibility in how it is developed, greater density, and preservation of wetlands <br />and additional open spaces. <br />Ms. Haake asked if the PUD allows more building stories. Director Ericson stated that is correct. <br />Ms. Haake asked if the PUD has to be done before any site work or removal of trees. Director <br />Ericson stated it will be done before "shovels are out there." <br />Ms. Haake stated it will be a zoning ordinance change and residents can have a referendum on a <br />rezoning. <br />City Attorney Riggs advised there was a case in the Minnesota Court of Appeals in 2002 <br />regarding a Best Buy project in Richfield called "Nordmarken versus the City of Richfield." The <br />Court of Appeals has stated, this is the basic holding, that the referendum would be in conflict <br />with State law; that State Law preempted the Charter with respect to land use issues. City <br />Attorney Riggs stated that is the State law on the books and it is very recent. In response to Ms. <br />Haake's question, City Attorney Riggs stated the answer would be likely no. That would not be <br />subject to referendum and courts have ruled on it very recently, within the last three years. <br />Ms. Haake stated there is another case study called "Denny versus Duluth" and in that case it <br />• does state that any zoning change has got to be done by ordinance and it is a legislative act. <br />City Attorney Riggs clarified that is not what Nordmarken found. <br />Ms. Haake stated it is and there has to be research on that and she would be happy to hear what <br />that research found. She stated it is her understanding that would be open to referendum as far as <br />she understands with court cases. <br />Duane McCarty, 8060 Long Lake Road, stated yes it has been his experience in 15 years of <br />elected office that all zoning changes were done by ordinance and in some cases, down zoning <br />for example, needs afour-fifths votes. He stated the Denny versus Duluth case was a Supreme <br />Court decision, not Court of Appeals, in 1968. In that case zoning was determined to be a <br />legislative police power act and will be subject to referendum under the City Charter. He stated <br />the information that residents have been receiving has been very confusing and he doesn't want <br />to go down that road so far that it can't be stopped. He stated he had attended a Rotary meeting <br />where Medtronic presented that the City would get $169,000 a year in all fees, $43,000 a year in <br />real estate taxes, and $46,000 a year in administrative fees. However, if this is TIF related it <br />cannot be used in the general fund. He noted there is an $80,000 franchise fee, which the City <br />has been trying to get rid of and to put the fee on property tax. He suggested Medtronic check <br />with the business community who has been against that type of fee for a long time. He stated <br />there are still many issues with this contract and he is open to a discussion with Mr. McCombs. <br />• Ken Glidden, 5240 Edgewood Drive, stated he does not know what the commitment step <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.