Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 6650AEXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 6650q • CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING SUBDIVISION OF CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW PROPERTY WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View (the "City") is the owner of a parcel of land located within the City of Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota, that is in need of subdivision to permit the splitting of the parcel of land for economic development purposes; WHEREAS, a legal description exists of record with the Ramsey County Recorder for the parcel of land as follows: See Exhibit A which is hereinafter referred to as the "Property"; and WHEREAS, a proposed description for the two parcels to be created from the Property and constituting the proposed subdivision of the Property is as follows: Parcel A -- See Exhibit B and Parcel B -- See Exhibit C; WHEREAS, the City Council, at a meeting duly held on October 3, 2005, reviewed said subdivision; WHEREAS, the Staff Report set forth at Exhibit D is incorporated into and made a part of this Resolution as if fully set forth herein; WHEREAS, the City Council makes the following findings regarding the subdivision of the Property: The Property has historically been treated as though it was two separate parcels as it is severed and divided by State Highway No. 10; 1~ u SJR-269118v1 MU205-30 A-1 2. The subdivision is consistent with the actions contemplated in 2005 Minnesota Session Laws Chapter 152; 3. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed subdivision on July 20, 2005, • when the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed sale of Property to Medtronic, which sale includes only a portion of the existing tax parcel; 4. The City Council held public hearings which necessarily contemplated the subdivision on May 23, 2005 (comprehensive plan amendment); July 11, 2005 (sale of land); and August 22, 2005 (establishment of TIF district}; 5. The proposed subdivision is fully consistent with the purpose and intent of the City's subdivision regulations; 6. The approval of the subdivision by the Council will not be a detriment to the public welfare and will not impair the intent and purpose of the subdivision regulations; 7. The Council's failure to approve the subdivision would impair the City's ability to comply with existing provisions of other laws; 8. The Property is part of a proposed plat and planned unit development that is presently subject to the City's development review process; 9. The approval is consistent with the exceptions set forth in Minnesota Statutes Section 462.358, Subd. 4b(b) and (c), and Subd. 6, and City Code Section 1205.02; 10. Based upon the exceptional topography and other physical conditions of the Property in that the Property is severed by State Highway No. 10 into two distinct parcels, the strict compliance with the City's subdivision regulations could cause an exceptional and cuidue hardship on the substantial enjoyment of a property right, and such relief lnay be granted without detriment to the public welfare and without impairing the intent and purpose of the City's subdivision regulations; 11. Compliance with the above-referenced statutory restrictions will create an unnecessary hardship; failure to comply with such restrictions does not interfere with the purpose of the City's subdivision regulations. WHEREAS, such aparcel-split can be accomplished as a subdivision pursuant to the Mounds View City Code Section 1205.02 and Minnesota Statutes Section 462.358, Subd. 4b(b) and (c) and Subd. 6; WHEREAS, it appears that it will be in the best interest of the City to approve such subdivision; WHEREAS, a majority of all members of the City Council concur in this Resolution. SJR-269118v] MU205-30 A-2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW, MINNESOTA, AS FOLLOWS: 1. The recitals set forth above in this Resolution are incorporated into and made a part of tlus Resolution and constitute the findings of the City Council concerning this matter. 2. The requirements for this subdivision pursuant to the Mounds View City Code and Minnesota Statutes are hereby deemed satisfied. 3. The subdivision contemplated herein is hereby approved. 4. The City-Clerk Administrator is authorized to take all necessary further action to implement this Resolution. Dated: October 3, 2005. ,,, Rob arty, Mayor ATTEST: ~~~` ~ a urt Ulrich, City Clerk-Administrator • SJR-269118v1 MU205-30 A-3 EXHIBIT A Legal Description of Property • That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. The South Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 5, Township 30 North, Range 23 West, Ramsey County, Minnesota. Which lies southerly of a line run parallel with and distant 100 feet southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1: Beginning at a point on the north and south quarter line of said Section 5, distant 608.35 feet north of the center of said Section 5; thence run southeasterly at an angle of 71 degrees IO minutes 29 seconds from said north and south quarter line (measured from south to east) for 447.07 feet; thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 3820.91 feet and a delta angle of 10 degrees 56 minutes 13 seconds for 729.36 feet; thence on tangent to said curve for 934.98 feet; thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 63b.29 feet and a delta angle of 60 degrees 29 minutes 19 seconds for 671.75 feet and there terminating. Together with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described, which lies northerly and westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the center of said Section 5; thence north on an azimuth of 359 degrees 23 minutes 10 seconds (azimuth oriented to Minnesota State Plane Coordinate System) along the north and south quarter line of said Section 5 for 781.42 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence on an azimuth of 108 degrees 12 minutes 41 seconds, 231.14 feet; thence on an azimuth of 98 degrees 27 minutes 03 seconds, 1486.78 feet; thence run northeasterly for 447.16 feet on anon-tangential curve, concave to the northwest, having a radius of 720 feet, a delta angle of 35 degrees 35 minutes 02 seconds and a chord azimuth of 76 degrees 55 minutes 11 seconds; thence on an azimuth of 59 degrees 07 minutes 40 seconds, 192.89 feet; thence run northerly 398.14 feet on anon-tangential curve, concave to the northwest, having a radius of 850 feet, a delta angle of 26 degrees 50 minutes 15 seconds and a chord azimuth of 29 degrees 26 minutes OS seconds; thence on an azimuth of 16 degrees 00 minutes 57 seconds, 303.65 feet to the north line of said Tract A and there terminating. SJR-269118v1 MU205-30 A-1 EXHIBIT B Legal Description of Parcel A That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. The South Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 5, Township 30 North, Range 23 West, Ramsey County, Minnesota; Which lies northerly and westerly of the following described Iine: Commencing at the center of said Section 5; thence north on an azimuth of 3.59 degrees 23 minutes 10 seconds (azimuth oriented to Minnesota State Plane Coordinate System) along the north and south quarter line of said Section 5 for 781.42 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence on an azimuth of 108 degrees 12 minutes 41 seconds, 231.14 feet; thence on an azimuth of 98 degrees 27 minutes 03 seconds, 1486.78 feet; thence run northeasterly for 447.16 feet on anon-tangential curve, concave to the northwest, having a radius of 720 feet, a delta angle of 35 degrees 35 minutes 02 seconds and a chord azimuth of 76 degrees 55 minutes 11 seconds; thence on an azimuth of 59 degrees 07 minutes 40 seconds, 192.89 feet; thence run northerly 398.14 feet on a non-tangential curve, concave to the northwest, having a radius of 850 feet; a delta angle of 26 degrees 50 minutes 15 seconds and a chord azimuth of 29 degrees 26 minutes OS seconds; thence on an azimuth of 16 degrees 00 minutes 57 seconds, 303.65 feet to the north line of said Tract A and there terminating. • S7R-269118v1 MU205-30 B-1 EXHIBIT C Legal Description of Parcel B That part of Tract A described below: Tract A. The South Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 5, Township 30 North, Range 23 West, Ramsey County, Minnesota. Which lies southerly of a line run parallel with and distant 100 feet southerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1: Beginning at a point on the north and south quarter line of said Section 5, distant 608.35 feet north of the center of said Section 5; thence run southeasterly at an angle of 71 degrees 10 minutes 29 seconds from said north and south quarter line (measured from south to east) for 447.07 feet; thence deflect to the left on a tangential curve having a radius of 3820.91 feet and a delta angle of 10 degrees 56 minutes 13 seconds for 729.36 feet; thence on tangent to said curve for 934.98 feet; thence deflect to the right on a tangential curve having a radius of 636.29 feet and a delta angle of 60 degrees 29 minutes 19 seconds for 671.75 feet and there terminating. • SJR-269ll 8v 1 MU205-30 C-1 EXHIBIT D City of Mounds View Staff Report Dated October 3, 2005 For Resolution No. 6650 Item No. Meeting Date: October 3, 2005 Type of Business: CC WK: Work Session; PH.• Public Hearing; CA: Consent Agenda; EDA: EDA Business Administrator Review: City of Mounds View .Staff Report To: Mounds View City Council • From: Aaron Backman, Economic Development Coordinator Item Title/Subject: Resolution No. 6650 Approving the Subdivision of Property Pursuant to Purchase Agreement and Contract for Private Redevelopment Dated August 31, 2005, by and between the City of Mounds View, Mounds View Economic Development Authority and Medtronic, Inc. Date of Report: October 3, 2005 • Background: In order to comply with the terms and conditions of the Purchase Agreement and Contract for Private Development executed on August 31, 2005, by and between the City, the EDA and Medtronic (the "Development Agreement"), the City must acknowledge and approve the subdivision of one of the parcels of land that will be included in the conveyance. The parcel of land in question was deeded to the City pursuant to special legislation in 1988 (Minnesota Laws, 1988, Chapter 61) and is commonly referred to as the former "MnDOT parcel", hereinafter referred to as the "Property". As a general rule, if a transfer of land involves the conveyance of something less than an entire tax parcel, the property being transferred must be subdivided pursuant to the regulations that have been adopted by the City in which the property is located. Minnesota Statutes authorize municipalities, by ordinance, to enact subdivision regulations establishing standards, requirements and procedures for the review and approval or disapproval of subdivisions. See Minnesota Statutes Section 462.358, subd. 1(a) (2004). State law requires that municipal subdivision regulations include public hearings on subdivision applications prior to the preliminary approval "unless otherwise provided by law or charter" Minnesota Statutes Section 462.358, subd. 3(b} (2004), or if the parcel meets certain characteristics as set forth in Minnesota Statutes SJR-26911$vl MU205-30 D-1 Section 462.358, subd. 4b(b) and (c) and "[i]n any case in which compliance with the foregoing restrictions [of Subd. 4b] will create an unnecessary hardship and failure to comply does not interfere with the purpose of the subdivision regulations, the platting authority may waive such compliance by adoption of a resolution to that effect." The City adopted subdivision regulations by ordinance in 1988. These regulations are codified in Title 1200 of the City Code. The City's regulations generally require that the Planning Commission and Council review all subdivision applications and that public hearings be held on the proposed subdivision prior to the Council's approval of the application. City Code Section 1205.02 allows the City to deviate from the City's subdivision regulations "where the subdivider can show that, by reason of exceptional topography or other physical conditions, the strict compliance with ... [the subdivision] regulations could cause an exceptional and undue hardship on the substantial enjoyment of a property right; provided, such relief may be granted without detriment to the public welfare. and without impairing the intent and purpose of [the subdivision regulations]." History: The Property has historically been treated as two separate parcels. In the 1980's, State Highway No. 10 was constructed, effectively dividing the tax parcel into two pieces. Since this time, deeds and other instruments relating to the Property have routinely referred to the Property by two separate metes and bounds descriptions. In 2005, the City sought special legislation to provide for the creation of a TIF district and also for the removal of the right of reverter held by the State of Minnesota on one half of the tax parcel. After discussions with the State of Minnesota (Minnesota Department of Transportation), the description used in the special legislation mirrored the language from previous instruments even though that language includes only part of the entire tax parcel. Applicability of Subdivision Regulations on this approval: State statute and the City's Code are silent on whether the subdivision regulations apply to city-owned property. Regardless, as noted above, the City has some flexibility over the subdivision process. For example, the City may grant a variance to the subdivision regulations upon a finding that a hardship exists and that the proposed subdivision would be without detriment to the public welfare and would not impair the intent and purpose of the subdivision regulations. (See City Code Section 1205.02) In addition, Minnesota courts have held that municipalities are given discretion to decide matters related to variances and subdivisions. See VanLandschoot v. City of Mendota Heights, 336 N.W.2d 503 (Minn. 1983). In that instance, the City has substantially complied with the requirements of the City Code. The safe of the land to Medtronic necessarily contemplates the subdivision of the property. Pursuant to the Development Agreement, the City is only authorized to convey a portion of the tax parcel. The Planning Commission and Council have reviewed and considered the terms and conditions of the sale of the Property to Medtronic. At all times, this review, and the public hearings held in accordance with the SJR-269118v1 MU205-30 D-2 review, contemplated the subdivision of the Property. This review, and the public hearings, satisfy the underlying goals of the regulations. (See City Code Section 1201.01, subd. 2). The subdivision of the Pro ert was also contem lated b the s ecial le islation p Y p Y p g regarding the Property adopted in 2005. Minnesota Session Laws 2005, Chapter 152, section 26 establishes a tax increment district that, by the express language in the legislation, necessitates this subdivision. The special legislation also authorizes the conveyance of the State's interest to the City in preparation for the sale of the Property to Medtronic. See Minnesota Session Laws 2005, Chapter 152, section 27. The deed, authorized by the statute and issued by the state (see the deed from the State set forth within this Staff Report), contemplates the subdivision of the Property because it releases the right of reverter only on that part of the Property that {ies north of State Highway No. 10. The proposed subdivision of the Property is consistent with the goals of the City's subdivision regulations. The City Code indicates that the regulations are not intended to "repeal, abrogate, annul or in any way impair or interfere with: a) existing provisions of other laws or ordinance". Since the State law authorizing the creation of the TIF district and the removal of the reverter contemplated the subdivision, approval of the subdivision is in order to comply with the statutory requirements. The approval is consistent with the exceptions set forth in Minnesota Statutes Section 462.358, subd. 4b(b) and (c). In addition, the Property is part of a proposed plat and planned unit development that is presently subject to the City's development review process. Recommendation: Based on the above-referenced discussion and on the following findings, it is recommended that the Council approve Resolution No. 6650 approving the subdivision of the Property: Findings: 1. The Property has historically been treated as though it was two separate parcels as it is severed and divided by State Highway No. 10; 2. The subdivision is consistent with the actions contemplated in 2005 Minnesota Session Laws Chapter 152; 3. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed subdivision on July 20, 2005, when the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed sale of Property to Medtronic, which sale includes only a portion of the existing tax parcel; 4. The City Council held public hearings which necessarily contemplated the subdivision on May 23, 2005 (comprehensive plan amendment); July 11, 2005 (sale of land); and August 22, 2005 (establishment of TIF district); SJR-269118v1 MU205-30 D-3 5. The proposed subdivision is fully consistent with the purpose and intent of the City's subdivision regulations; 6. The approval of the subdivision by the Council will not be a detriment to the public welfare and will not impair the intent and purpose of the subdivision regulations; 7. The Council's failure to approve the subdivision would impair the City's ability to comply with existing provisions of other laws; 8. The Property is part of a proposed plat and planned unit development that is presently subject to the City's development review process; 9. The approval is consistent with the exceptions set forth in Minnesota Statutes Section 462.358, Subd. 4b(b) and (c), and Subd. 6, and City Code Section 1205.02; 10. Based upon the exceptional topography and other physical conditions of the Property in that the Property is severed by State Highway No. 10 into two distinct parcels, the strict compliance with the City's subdivision regulations could cause an exceptional and undue hardship on the substantial enjoyment of a property right, and such relief may be granted without detriment to the public welfare and without impairing the intent and purpose of the City's subdivision regulations; 11. Compliance with the above-referenced statutory restrictions will create an unnecessary hardship; failure to comply with such restrictions does not interfere with the purpose of the City's subdivision regulations. Respectfully submitted, Aaron Backman Economic Development Coordinator • S1R-269118v1 MU205-30 D-4 RESOLUT[ON NO. 6650 • CITY OF II~tOUNDS V(EW COUNTY OF RAA~SEY 5TATE OF fd[[PdNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2006 SCORE RECYCLING GRANT REQUEST TO RATV(SEY GOUNTY WHEREAS, Ramsey County is accepting applications for use ofi SCORE funds to improve recycling participation by the public; and WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View is eligible to apply for a grant to provide administrative and promotional activities intended to improve recycling participation among city residents through education, awareness, and incentives; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mounds View has determined fhaf this is an appropriate use of city resources and that increasing recycling participation benefits the public health, safety and welfare of the community as a whole. NOW, THEREFORE, BE (T RESOLVED that the City Council of the City . of Mounds View approve the application for 2006 SCORE funding (attachment) and authorize acceptance of any allocated funding. Adopted this 10th day of October, 2005. Ro arty, Mayor ATTEST: ~J Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator (seal) t ur-co-cuuo i i:4sam rru,u-veriwi vrn~e ~r grew wmnnuerc~ni • ~~^ ~Op}~ ,i QUITCLAIM QEEQ STATE DEED TAX DUE HEREON: $ C.S. 6284 (35W-394) 902 Parcel ?and Excess Acquisition Parcel 7 County of Ramsey The State of Minnesota having a reverter interest in real estate hereinafter described, and the Commissioner of Transportation of said State having determined that the same is no longer needed; Now, therefore, upon said determination and pursuant to Minnesota Session u • Laws 2005, Chapter 152, the State of Minnesota,,by Carol Molnau, its Commissioner of Transportation, Grantor, for a valuable consideration, does hereby release, quitclaim and convey to the City of Mounds View, a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota, Grantee, all its interest in and to the real estate in Ramsey County, Minnesota, described as follows: All of Tract A described below: Tract A. That part of the South Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 5, Township 30 North, Range 23 West, Ramsey County, Minnesota, Eying northerly and westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the center of said 5ection~5; thence northerly on an azimuth of 359 degrees 23 minutes 10 seconds along the north and south quarter line thereof for 781.42 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence on an azimuth of 108 degrees 12 minutes 41 seconds for 231.14 feet; thence on an azimuth of 98 degrees 27 minutes 03 seconds for 1486.78 feet; thence easterly for 447.16 feet on anon-tangential curve, concave to the north, having a radius of 720.00 feet, a delta angle of 35 degrees 35 minutes 02 seconds, and a chord azimuth of 76 degrees 55 minutes 11 seconds; thence on an azimuth of 59 degrees 07 minutes 40 seconds for 192.89 feet; thence northeasterly for 398.14 feet on a non-tangential curve, concave to the northwest, having a radius of 850.00 feet, a delta angle of 26 degrees 50 minutes 15 seconds, and a chord azimuth of 29 degrees 26 minutes 05 seconds; thence on an azimuth of 16 degrees 00 minutes 57 seconds for 303.65 feet to the north fine of said South Half of the Northeast Quarter and there terminating; containing 41.87 acres, more or less; Subject to the following restrictions: No access shall be permitted to Trunk Highway No. 35W or to Trunk Highway No. 10 frarn ~ the lands herein conveyed. Page 1 of 2 11:43am From-MN/DOT OFFICE OF LAND MANAGEMENT 6512975398 T-038 P.003/003 F-137 C~Op}~ ~v 'fiHE ABOVE DESCAIBED REAL PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO THE RIGHTS OE EXISTING UTIL1TtES, IF ANY, AS PROVIDED tN MINNESOTA STATUTES §161.45 SUBDIVISION 3. The Seiler certrfies that the Seller does not know of any wells on the described real property. -rG, Dated this 2 7 day of ~~,~~ ~p5 STATE OF MINNESOTA (Director of the Office of Land Management) -I~'~ Seal of the Commissioner of Transportation STATE OF MINNESOTA } ss. COUNTY OF RAMSEY ) On this 2?''`~' day of ~Seg~y: .2005 ,before me, a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared ~~/+~v ~ P,.rt' ~ to me personally known to be the person who executed the foregoing instrument and who did say that he is the ( (Director of the Office of Land Management and duly authorized agent of the Commissioner of Transportation) of the State of Minnesota and acknowledged that he executed the foregoing instrument and caused the seal of the Commissioner of Transportation to be affixed thereto, by authority of Minnesota Session Laws 2005, Chapter 152, and as the free act and deed of said State. This instrument was drafted by the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation, Legal and Property Management Unit, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 R72741 F-06w.doc RONALO P LAM8ER1 NOTgRY PUBLIC-MWNE50'i'A MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JAN. 31.201 D Page 2 of 2