Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-04-1998 MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION 4 NOVEMBER 4, 1998 . 0 7:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda CITIZENS: BEFORE SPEAKING,PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM, AND GIVE YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE MINUTES 4. Approval of Minutes a. September 16, 1998 b. October 7, 1998 5. Staff Reports/Information Items • a. Preliminary Discussion of Parking Variance Request by Donatelles Supper Club at 2400 Highway 10. b. Discussion of City Remnant Parcel. c. Resignation of Planning Commissioner Bobbi Brooks. d. Request for Extension of Comprehensive Plan Submittal Deadline. 6. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners Reports 7. Adjournment to Agenda Meeting (Immediately Following Regular Meeting) * * « * ,c * * * * * * * . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * APPLICANTS:YOUR A IT ENDANCE AT THIS MEETING IS REQUESTED. PLEASE NOTIFY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AT 717-4020 IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO A FIEND. THANK YOU. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * AGENDA MEETING AGENDA 1. Comprehensive Plan Public Facilities Element 0 N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDE V\PLANC OMM\PCAGENDA\1998\11-4-98.AGN 1 • • 1 5cL . REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION illMeeting Date: September 16, 1998 Staff Report by: James Ericson, Planning Associate Planning Case No.: 538-98 Applicant: Donatelles Request: The applicant is requesting a five-foot parking lot setback Location: 2400 Highway 10 PIN Nos. 083023240057 Zoning/Land Use: B-3, Highway Business District/Restaurant Applicable Regulations: Section 1104.01, Subd. 4c(2): Parking lots shall maintain a thirty-foot setback from the front property line. • Section 1121.09, Subd. 7 requires (among other things) that driveways and stalls shall be surfaced with a bituminous material, and that the City shall review site and drainage plans for proposals to surface driveways and stalls for five or more vehicles. Section 1121.09, Subd. 11, requires that all open, off-street parking areas shall have a perimeter curb barrier around the entire parking lot with landscaping provided in all areas bordering parking area. Section 1125.02, Subd 2 outlines the_criteria to he used by the Planning Commiscinn ;nits review of variances. Attachments: Planning Application Zoning Map Proof of Ownership Letter from Applicant's Representative Site Plan (Separate Attachment) Background: The applicant is requesting a variance from the required thirty-foot setback established for parking 0 lots in a business district. The Donatelles parking lot, which has been located in its present location since the 1960s, currently does not meet this requirement. The applicant, in conjunction with the development of the theater site to the north, will be removing its Highway 10 access in return for , Donatelle's Variance Planning Case No. 538-98 November 4, 1998 Page 2 allowing a through access to the theater site. To compensate Donatelles for this concession, the 10 theater developer has offered to resurface, curb and gutter the parking lot, as shown on the attached plans dated 10/21/98. In three separate areas on the Donatelles site, the extent of the parking lot non-conformity will be lessened as pavement will be removed in the setback area and within the right of way itself. The existing parking lot and access fronting County Road H2 will not be altered, with the exception of removing forty feet of impervious surface from the access, reducing the overall width of the access from 180 feet to 140 feet. It is expected that the nonconforming County Road H2 access (which is too wide) will be addressed with any future reconstruction of County Road H2. Analysis: The planned improvements to the Donatelles parking lot result from a MnDOT stipulation that requires Donatelles' Highway 10 access be closed in order for the Theater site to have a second Highway 10 access on their property. Donatelles has agreed to the closure of its access on the condition that their customers be able to use the Theater's Highway 10 access to gain entrance to the Donatelles parking lot by means of a throughway between the two properties, and that the Donatelles parking lot be improved and expanded. The plans submitted by the applicant for the parking lot improvements represent a vast 1110 improvement over the current state of Donatelles parking area. The parking area, which was constructed more than thirty years ago, did not violate any City setback requirements at the time of its construction. The basis of the hardship, as applied to the Donatelles property, results from the size and shape of the lot, and the fact that it is bordered by streets on two of its three sides. The impact of enforcing the setbacks as they are written in Chapter 1104 of the Zoning Code to the Donatelles property would create a situation in which that the business could no longer effectively operate. The restaurant would potentially lose 50 of its parking stalls, leaving 25 or less stalls for its clientele. By paving the dirt area at the southeast corner of the lot, closing its Highway 10 access and installing curb and gutter, the restaurant will be able to increase its parkingavailability while significantly improving the overall appearance of the property as well. Criteria for Granting Variances: (From Chapter 1125 of the City Code.) A variance to the provisions of the Zoning Code may be issued by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals to provide relief to the landowner in those cases where the Code imposes undue hardship or practical difficulties to the property owner in the use of property owner's land. A variance may be granted only in the event that the following circumstances exist: a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the properties which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the owners of the property since the effective date hereof have had no control. Donatelle's Variance Planning Case No. 538-98 November 4, 199 Page 3 The Donatelles property is a small, unusual pie-shaped lot at the intersection of two major roadways through the City. Being less than an acre in area, the lot without question creates practical difficulties which the present owners did not create. This criterion is met. b. The literal interpretation of the provisions of this Title would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this Title. To enforce the thirty-foot parking lot setback onto the Donatelles property after thirty years of operation in its present state would potentially deprive the property of as many as 50 parking stalls. A reduction of spaces by that amount would effectively prohibit the restaurant from operating any further at that location. This criterion is met. c. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. The applicant is only seeking to improve the appearance and functionality of the parking lot and to lessen the extent of the nonconformity. The applicant did not create the conditions which necessitate the approval of a variance. This criterion is met. d. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Title to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. Donatelles restaurant was one of the first businesses located in the City of Mounds View, a fixture that has continued to do business through four decades to the present. At the time the restaurant was established at its present location, there were no setback requirements. Granting a variance in this situation would not confer upon the applicant a special privilege, in that any property owner in a similar circumstance would be given the same consideration. This criterion is met. e. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Economic conditions alone shall not be considered a hardship. The variance requested is the minimum necessary to alleviate the hardship in that the intent of the request is to lessen the extent of the existing nonconformity and to improve the overall appearance of the property. This criterion is met. f. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other property in the same zone. The Zoning Code was not drafted with the intent to prevent a legally conforming business from improving its operation. Granting the requested variance would serve only to Donatelle's Variance Planning Case No. 538-98 November 4, 1998 1 Page 4 • legitimize a dimensional nonconformity which has been in existence for thirty years. This criterion is met. g. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. Granting of this requested variance will improve the flow of traffic in and around this site and will be a benefit to public safety by closing the Highway 10 access from the Donatelles property. No property values will be diminished or impaired as a result of the Donatelles improvements. This criterion is met. Recommendation: Given the information presented and the fact that all criteria for granting a variance are satisfied, it is the recommendation of staff to prepare a resolution approving a variance for reduced parking lot setbacks for the Donatelles property, located 2400 Highway 10. 11111 James Ericson, Planning Associate N:\DATA\GROUPS\C OMDE V1DE VCASES\538-98\VARIANC E.RPT Oct 22 98 04: 08p Wende, 1 R. Smith 612-484-0699 p. 2 ri COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION LEW 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View MN 55112 ori-Partae441° 612-717-4020 • 6I2-784-3462 -FAX Please Type or Print Information-Complete Both Sides of This Form Applicant Information Name of Applicant { jgT'-1'-e. ' Address -L�1' i� t/2,0.1.--/— Telephone 6/a `�5Y 7 SlG O o lO /I-y z4. Fax ') ( 7L_ act/ OJ U/ / 4/* 5574x. Interest in Property(check appropriate box) » Owner of Property Q Lessee,Op�r,Manager 0 Contract for Deed Owner Q Other(explain) o Agreement to Purchase Applicants must provide evidence of interest in property at the time of application,and if you are not the owner property,you must provide a letter of permission from the owner giving consent to the filing'of this applicaon . The e property owner must sign this application for it to be accepted. 411 Property Description/Proposal Address or General Location.' . -<:0• ��, � ;;: � Legall cri-6.....__.... .... �Gc A.1'fitC.btd'� Property Identification#(PIN#) #of Acres ©.CI Zoning Type of Application 0 amprehensive PIan Amendment 0 Rezoning .. 5250 Major Subdivision 5250/acre, min$250 max.$1500 Q . Minor Subdivision $250+$250 deposit* 0 Planned Unit Development(PUD) Ref O PUD Amendrnent Refer to rezoning fees o Conditional Use Permit 5350 Variance R-1, R-2$75;all others$250 a Code Appeal R-I, R-2 5100 all others$250 to Develop Review/Site Plan $100 S I 25/acre;min$125 max$750 o Wetland Alteration Permit • 0 Wetland Buffer Permit R-1,R-2 S150;all others$200 0. Floodplain Permit $21,R-2$25;all others$t00 0 Other 5200 Ill ...._._...._._________ _._.___._._____________ *Deposits shall be paid to cover all costs of public notices,materials and star or consultant time spent in the review, research or preparation of materials associated with this application. The incurred costs in excess of the initial deposit amount applicant shall be responsible for all reasonable incur applicant Any portion of the deposit not spent or encumbered shall be refunded pP thirty(30)days after consideration of the application is completed. Oct 22 98 04: 09p Wendell R. Smith 612-484-0699 p. 3 PaPresent Uscojp . y U �.Dnp/ex/Two Family Dwe a Single milyyD fling BusinesslCommerCiai.� ° Multi-family Dwelling 8 . o . Other(explain} Establishment Industrial Estabiis a t Property Classification C. A bstract a Tamens tion ofProposal. BY MY(OUR)SIGNATURE ON THIS APPLICATION,I KNOWLEDGE,THE INFO HEREBY DECLARE THAT,TO THE BEST OF MY RMATIONPR01/IDS3IS 'UE AND ACCURATE. Si ture•ofApplicant :di// 17.- Name of Applicant(typal j/P�taf r' �2� -� Si1110 / gnaNre ofProper y 0O wn • w Name ofProperty Owner Ope• d/pz?ateo} G2 ownC: :.:. _ Phone Number of Owner 6 • ************************************************,.*«..**aa***s*.***********s****** Daft;of SubmittalFOR OFFICE USE ONLY : Date of Acceptance • ,Plarn�g Cue No. � ,� Assigned to: 60-dayLvtut I3U-dar3imit Fees Paid: Account# Check# - >APplic on: d: ap 1a4o � , / � DS lb Deposits: Other Total: NODA AValty lPS1CpMDEV1FOR StligVAPP.FOR • • I....JJ /JJT 7511 7521 7520 .4 7505 7504 7501 i. 4 � � PF .'y E CITY HALL 5395 Community 5387 5394 Center 5381 ti doIller 'WI a-3Mil s PUD I � s, 44 5j S33 53;; Theater J 'ti, 5 s33c Site O s s . s� o s �0,a� S `;O� ,�• S3o 5299 e/Jes ?9) S� �O 1/45;1_ Q 529 O 1)4 8 OAIM LA-i I- • 03 0 M N p 01 (0 N (p I. N =swatter igaii h N N — N N to eTh Le) cr) 5?9 N c' N 01 N tet'. �r1911 " N ��� 5273 N N N N N N \ 5260 `5262 529 5256 526 5256 5267 528 6-3 « ry �^�°' �'— 5261 _ 5250 5255 5250 5255 0 5260 5277 52• • 5249 52444-85292 5309 5284 R—,, ,�` 5249 et � N cc O 0) v to r•-• �:.. . ti W i 5243 5238 .r v v. .r 5290 529901�K�Vi `0 �[ 524.E N N N N N N N N :: :: 528• .�t; �52 OXY['1U A\/c- � Q 527'Mgr 5231m 5226 N co in v- v M N r 5231• N N N1. N N N N r 5260, 5269 526• 5269 • 526• •4 26 5225 5220 5225 - (cD ca al vv N 5250 5259 525 525• 525•"259 5� 5219 5214 5219 N( tV N lV N N N N 5240 52 524. • 5248 5249 524052 419 LANE 5230 5239 W 5230 5239 5230 523• 5; N N O 7 CO O (O CO Q N (O Z ci 2 ur 0 O N N N N N r"-' N N N N N N N N W 5220 5229 52201522' , 522. 522: 5: Et 5206 ' 5207 ,n rn M in r' rn V) 5210 5219° 521. 521 • 5210 521 • 5: 5200 �. . 5201 NN NN I N d- NN N �. 'i7 „nnc,nal �7(!t1 Cin. ^.r ��nna =- Zoning Map Planning Case 538-98 Applicant: Donatelles Location: 2400 Highway 10 N4 Oct 22 98 04: 09p Wendell R. Smith 612-484-0699 p. 4. . . f A t i I 4 ; rt .! III , ,1 . , .A,c ,,,, _,_. _. ., , : '.1 . i( 5 , , . ,� Wendell R. Smith C-armeraai Real Estate Development,C rsuhing and Brokerage October 22, 1998 Mr.Jim Ericson Associate Planner City of Mounds View 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View,lVfmnesota 55112 RE: Setback Variance for Donatelle's Supper Club Dear Mr.Ericson: As a representative of Donatelle's, I am requesting the ability to put in curbs and gutters along Highway 10,closing offthe access point to Highway 10, and paving the section of the property that is now dirt. I understand that in order to do this,I will need a variance • en the front yard setback. As you know,I also represent Anthony Properties,who is developing the theater site. In order to get a new signalized.intersection,Anthony Properties and the City were required to have access onto County Road 11-2. Also,the state required that in order to have the second access to Highway 10,which is closest to Donatelle's,we would have to have Donatelle's agree to close their existing access. In the past months,Donatelle's has agreed to close offtheir access point and Anthony Properties has agreed to give Donatelle's access to th- , . . .. . way10. In doingso, we have agreed to n - - .. � put in the curb and gutter along the highway, close offthe.access point,pave the area of the parking lot that is now dirt and move their sign-to thenorthwest corner of their property. You have the site plan that shows these changes. I tmdercrand that in order to do this,we will need a variance approved by the Planning Commission-Therefore, I have attached an application for the variance, along with a check for$250. I understand that the setback for thefront yard is 30 feet. The existing parking lot is now 5 feet from the highway right of way. By moving any curbing or parking back to meet the 10 1210_Josephine Rd.•Roseville,MN 55113•(612)4434-5.-4.•FAX: 1i4 3.co 9•E-rnuil-vV5M n-icfParg.com . Oct 22 98 04: 09p Wendell R. Smith 612-484-0699 p. 5 • current code, you would have to go aa the way to the corner of the building and would lose parking in project that needs as much parking as they can get. It would truly be a hardship for Donatelle's to have to meet the current code requirements. The new owners of Donatelle's are cleaning up the looks of the building. Recently they have painted the outside and are now in the process of putting on a new roof By putting in the curbs and gutters along the highway and paving the dirt parking area,this will be a positive improvement to their image,while increasing the safety of their patrons. Just as important, by allowing us top in these improvements, and granting Donatelle's a variance,it will allow us to close off an existing access that.is somewhat dangerous and very close to the intersection of County Road H-2 and Highway 10. Also in closing the existing access,Afmnesota.DOT will allow a second access_onto HIgh way 10 from the Anthony project. This new wcesc will be liuthcr from the intersection and will have a deceleration lane. This second access from the Anthony property will allow more traffic to exit onto Highway 10 instead of using the exit onto 11-2. If the theater project does not get the second exit,then we can be assured that there will be more people using the H-2 exit. We believe that this is.a win-win situation for all parties. This includes the City, 410, Donatelle's,Anthony Properties, and the neighbors who live south of ther hopeful that the Planning Commission will also see the value of the variance We are requesting. Mr. Ericson,if you need any further information, please feel free to call me. Sincerely, ,i6)11)1447111 1/6/ 153— Wendell R. Smith .Indlvlduel SNler ewr,.sae UNranlCw,••I..; W.W.I Ilr/el • No delinquent taxes and transfer entered: Certificate of Real Estate Value ( ) filed ( ) not required , 19 k County Auditor By Deputy (reserved for recording data) MORTGAGE REGISTRY TAX DUE HEREON: $ (reserved for mortgage registry tax payment data) Date: In kyr... t 3 0 19 98 THIS CONTRACT FOR DEED is made on the above date by Edward A. Donacelle and Linda Donatelle husband and wife , (marital status) Seller(whether one or more), and Hurricane real Properties. LLP , Purchaser(whether one or inure). Seller and Purchaser agree to the following terms: I. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION. Seller hereby sells, and Purchaser hereby buys, real property in Ramsey County, Minnesota,described as follows: That part of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 8, Township 30, Range 23 lying Southwesterly of Trunk Highway 110, Ramsey, County, Minnesota together with all hereditaments and appurtenances belonging thereto(the Property). 2. TITLE. Seller warrants that title to the Property is, on the date of this contract, subject only to the following exceptions: (a) Covenants, conditions, restrictions, declarations and easements of record, if any; (b) Reservations of minerals or mineral rights by the State of Minnesota. if any; (c) Building, zoning and subdivision laws and regulations; (d) The lien of real estate taxes and installments of special assessments which are payable by Purch- aser pursuant to paragraph 6 of this contract; and (e) The following liens or encumbrances: • None 3. DELIVERY OF DEED AND EVIDENCE OF TITLE. Upon Purchaser's prompt and full performance of this contract, Seller shall: (a) Execute, acknowledge and deliver to Purchaser a Warranty Deed. in recordable form, conveying marketable title to the Property to Purchaser, subject only to the fol- lowing exceptions: (i) Those exceptions referred to in paragraph 2(a). (b). (c)and(d)of this contract: (ii) Liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters which Purchaser has created. suffered or permitted to accrue after the date of this contract; and lb. I It:/k1 lllvl,;S. I lca(Iings of the paragt..•'L.. ill Ihus coon;..l arc lu1 ....lvenle:... U...j and tit)nu((1r.I.0.. • . li111i1 or construe the contents of such paragraphs. 19. ASSESSMENTS BY OWNERS' ASSOCIATION. If the Property is subject to a recorded declaration providing for assessments to be levied against the Property by any owners' association, which assess- ments may become a lien against the Property if not paid, then: (a) Purchaser shall promptly pay, when due, all assessments imposed by the owners' association ur t other governing body as required by the provisions of the declaration or other related documents; 1 and (b) So long as the owners' association maintains a master or blanket policy of insurance against fire. 1110 extended coverage perils and such other hazards and in such amounts as are required by this con- tract. then: (i) Purchaser's obligation in this contract to maintain hazard insurance coverage on the Property is satisfied; and (ii) The provisions in paragraph 8 of this contract regarding application of insurance proceeds shall be superseded by the provisions of the declaration or other related documents; and (iii) In the event of a distribution of insurance proceeds in lieu of restoration or repair following an insured casualty loss to the Property, any such proceeds payable to Purchaser are hereby as- signed and shall be paid to Seller for application to the sum secured by this contract, with the • excess, if any, paid to Purchaser. 20. ADDITIONAL.TERMS: See Attached Exhibit A / • SE��4.EER(S)� �I PURCHASER(S) t Cf%v ' /`If � �4L4�'���i HURRICANE CEAL PROPERTIES. LL1' Edward A. Donacelle By /j 11/3 I �• " — Al General Parrnpr ..---,Linda Donate e • County of State of Minnesota 1./iPt 't // _ I IL r `4h-tr '171e •foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this c day of knTil , 19 , by EDWARD A. DONATELLE AND LINDA DONATELLE, husband and wife NOTARIAL VAMP oR SEAL.IOR OT1MER TITLE OR HANK' - ewwNIAtYWANINV 1 2 r'•` OCUGLA i J.DEHN �6)�.�` r.1y comm.c:a.Jan.31,. ��.:, i - --- X'IMrrW:vV1i:.H.ti1:y�:rJ _1�'� "` ��.�'l SIGNATURE OF NOURY PUBLIC ommaonnam. State of Minnesota /� /' !L County of //)tLIKe'� The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this-=.1-11 ay of , 19-21, 4 by . a General Partner of Hurricane Ceal Properties. lk LLP. a limited liability partnership under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the mar-Gnersh in NOTARIAL-STAMP OR SEAL IOR OTHER TITLE OR RANKI i .___ �/ . JVYIIVl1kNy1 SIGMA 1HE OF NOTA I'UHIJC T1 EI R OFFICIAL. u''+ DOUGLAS J.DEHN Tax BRtoeMteataoerlyaaamieInMISiMsuumaunfit ii. wSaw(rala �'�_�a It'.1 tlOTAI Y PUtUc-IJItIIESOTA ,....,;00 My Comm.Co.Jen.31.2000?' 01.• N PrJ p.m..v wawa,'.rM'.i7.Y.. .-,.o? S')69 )r; ,.'..11. THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY SHAME AND ADDRESS' ,v1 Craig A. Erickson, Esq. / 'OV*013 V`fw, /1/"V -S1t3- Chestnut & Brooks, P.A. 3700 Piper Jaffray Tower Cj..1.v.\--tt•, 222 South Ninth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 �>A,v.a•w• CT AA i 1-2? 1113S' 4Yv0W'— A S1\,«\- NW Coon. em,„.,,,,, /1,1J 55\433 le A11.1inh. '1'O RECORD OR 1'I1.1': THIS cONT1tACr FOR IN':IS1) MAY GIVE O'I'III':R PARTIES n.. I I . . I II ♦ I 1..1•,,t.•12(.••••f• ..I 'MI I.* 11.II\..1.`.YI'V • J 1 ; \ A • QUITCLAIM DEED EASEMENT C.S.6204(102)901 Parcel 2172 County of Ramsey The State of Minnesota having heretofore acquired an easement for trunk highway purposes on the 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 Statutes Section 161.43, the State of Minnesota, by James N.Oenn, its Commissioner of Transportation, Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of Eight Thousand Five Hundred and No/100 Dollars($8,500.00)paid to the State for deposit in the trunk highway fund,does hereby release,quitclaim and convey to the present fee owner, Edward A. Donatelle.of411 Ramsey County, Minnesota,Grantee,all its interest in and to the real estate in Ramsey County, Minnesota,described as follows: That part of Tract A described below: . Tract A. That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 8, Township 30 North, Range 23 West, Ramsey County. Minnesota; distant west quarter line of said Section 8, southweste y of a line run paranortherly l el with and distant 75 feet southwesterly of Line 1 described below, southeasterly of Line 2 described below and westerly of Line 3 described below: Line 1. Beginning at a point on the east and west quarter line of said Section 8,distant 848.5 feet west of the center thereof;thence run northwesterly at an angle of 40 degrees 07 minutes 00 seconds from said east and west quarter line(measured from west to north)for 400 feet and there terminating Line 2. Beginning at a point on a line run parallel with and distant 75 feet southwesterly of Line 1 described above, distant 150 feet northwesterly of its intersection with a tine run parallel with and distant 33 feet northerly of the east and west quarter line of said Section 8; thence run southwesterly to a point on said 33 foot parallel tine, distant 150 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating: • Page 1 of 2 • f ' • Line 3. Beginning at a point on a line run parallel with and distant 75 feet southw I I of Line 1 described above, distant 75 feet northwesterly of its intersection with a 1 line run parallel with and distant 33 feet northerly of the east and west quarter • line of said Section 8; thence run southwesterly to a point on said 33 foot parallel line,distant 65 feet westerly of said intersection and there terminating; containing 0.13 acre,more or less; Subject to the following restrictions: No access shall be permitted to Trunk Highway No.62, renumbered 10 or to County Road No.H2 from the lands herein conveyed. Dated this day of )9,0 ,d, ,19 (97 STATE OF MINNESOTA By :/. a>, Ov�1 (Assistant Director of the Office of ' (Right of Way and Surveys) Seal of the Commissioner of Transportation STATE OF MINNESOTA ) 0 COUNTY OF RAMSEY ) 33. ) On this 1/ day of ,l9f(0,before me, a Notary Public within and for said County, perinally peered 6-. E/dol �k,a p to me personally known to be the person who executed the foregoing instrument and who did say that he is the --- -- - -- _ .• - (Assistant Director of the Office of Right of Way and Surveys 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 Statutes,Section 161.43, and as the free_act and deed of said State. •/A1307-roved as to form and execution: • MUM I. 0,41.111 • I (die ''� NOTdRTpijiUG-y1NME50TA / , hLU +Str COWS • Assistant Attorney General co.�� p ..wa This instrument was drafted by the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation, RNV Legal and alReal Estate Conveyance Unit, St. Paul. Minnesota 55155 R32421 G.07W Page 2 of 2 i 5 b. 11/ PLANNING COMMISSION MEMO To: Mounds View Planning Commission, From: Rick Jopke, Community Development Director Subject: Discussion of City Remnant Parcel Date: October 30, 1998 Background: When Edgewood Drive is relocated in the spring of 1999, a 1 1/2 acre remnant site will be created which could be developed. Also in the area is the Midland Videen property. It is located south of the Community Center property and east of Edgewood Drive. The property is approximately 9.4 acres in size. A wetland occupies a major portion of the property. There is approximately 1 1/2 acres at the southwest corner of the site that is developable. Because the two sites would be contiguous it makes sense to market them together to get the best development. The Midland Videen site also offers an opportunity to solve some parking and wetland mitigation problems on the adjacent Community Center site. In June of 1998 the City Council authorized staff(Resolution 5246)to enter into an option agreement to purchase the Midland Videen property and to send out a Request for Proposals (RFP) to seek unified well planned development on the parcels. An option agreement was drafted and given to a representative of the Midland Videen property owner. The option agreement has never been agreed to or signed by either the owner of the Midland Videen property or the City. Initially the City was waiting for final agreements on the theater property to insure that Edgewood Drive would be realigned and the remnant parcel created. The City is also proceeding with another alternative to solve the parking and wetland mitigation problem at the Community Center. The owner of the Midland Videen property has also been negotiating with other interested parties. City staff has drafted an RFP but has not sent it out because we do not control the Midland Videen property,the final plans for the realignment of Edgewood Drive have not been completed, and the exact size and configuration of the remnant parcel has not been determined. The City has recently received the attached Offer to Purchase the remnant parcel from TOLD Development Co. for$350,000. TOLD has a signed letter of intent to purchase the Midland Videen property. TOLD has not provided details at this time about how they would develop the properties. They have indicated that they would propose to develop a Walgreens store and fppossibly a restaurant if there is sufficient room on the site. I 4 Anthony Properties has also expressed interest in the site and requested an opportunity to bid on the City remnant parcel. They have indicated that they would be interested in developing an office building on the site. The City Council considered the offers and continued consideration indefinitely. They stated that it would be important to have additional Planning Commission review and input concerning what the land use should be on the parcels involved. The City owned remnant site is currently guided for CC Civic Center uses by the City's Comprehensive Plan and is zoned PF Public Facilities. The Midland Videen property is currently guided as MD Medium Density Residential by the Comprehensive Plan and is zoned B-3 Highway Business. A Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning of the city-owned remnant would be required if the site is to be developed for commercial uses. A Comprehensive Plan amendment for the Midland Videen property would also be required. The draft future land use plan which the Planning Commission is working on designates the sites as CC PUD Community Commercial Planned Unit Development. The City Council also expressed concern that we don't know the exact configuration of the remnant piece. Staff is working with SEH to finalize the plans for the street realignment project which will determine the final configuration of the remnant parcel. Staff has also asked for cost estimates for a plat to create a lot which could then be developed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the attached materials and recommend a specific best use for the site in question. N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV\PLANCOMM\10-30A-9.MEM i, l Midland Videen / 007 Property Site Map 41 �I. _..._, .,,,�,_ a fillillie frigii iiiti Ni.ik ,,IJI rillitill°1" 1,01a El il6k;t4:1111110., �a 1:h.�e n111�11i:�.-qui,...7-7,...V4 _.::'" = Ilia_ �._.. ... a." cm+4i:icilfi 11tliE �I, SIIlllll��':_I;!I{•������� �, tttttttttriui iiiiii Jefith IrQLD • OEVELOPMEM COMPANY A AI October 12, 1998 Mayor Duane McCarty City Council Members City of Mounds View • 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View, MN 55112 Re: Offer to Purchase Property Mounds View Dear Mayor McCarty and City Council Members: I am pleased to present to you this Offer to Purchase the parcel described herein under the following terms and conditions: • BUYER: Meridian Properties Real Estate Development LLC (d/b/a TO Development Company), its successors and assigns. SELLER: City of Mounds View. SITE: The site totals approximately 63,000 square feet located at the corner of Edgewood Drive and Highway 10, Mounds View, Minnesota. Site is that area south of the to-be-relocated Edgewood Drive, and is highlighted on the enclosed site •fan. SITE CocwrnoN & 'ORmATIOIY: Seller will provide copies of ail information relating to the site from Seller's files including but not limited to surveys, soil conditions, environmental reports, plans for buildings, specifications, and geotechnical information. Additionally, Seller will provide Buyer with copies of ail agreements with governmental authorities, easements or other agreements that will affect or encumber the property before or after a Closing. PURCHASE PRICE: Buyer agrees to pay the Purchase Price of Three Hundred Fifty Thousand and YO/100 dollars ($350,000.00). WEOCa/000 COMMERCE CENTRE • 5900`Y.dov�.. InnEAPOUS •^,NIIWA(lKE: , Mayor Duane McCarty City Council.ilembers October 12, 1998 ,1 Page? II A PURCHASE AGREEMENT: Buyer and Seller will enter into a Purchase Agreement within ten(10)days of acceptance of this Letter of Intent by Seller as proposed by Purchaser. Buyer shall prepare Purchase Agreement. Purchase Agreement shall be in a form substantially similar to that dated October 13, 1997 between the parties. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT: Seller will pay all levied or pending Special Assessments or other levies prior to closing. DUE DILIGENCE PERIOD: Buyer shall have one hundred eighty (180) days from the execution of a mutually acceptable Purchase Agreement to cancel the Purchase Agreement - due to the following: 1.) Buyer shall have been able to obtain all necessary governmental approvals and permits with regard to all applicable environmental, construction,zoning, platting,signage,subdivision,lot split,D.O.T access and turn lane agreements 111111 and other Iand use laws, ordinances and regulations and codes for the M construction and use ofthe Property(and adjacent property)as Buyer intends. 2.) Buyer shall have been able to determine that all necessary utilities, including, but not limited to, natural gas, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water, are located at the property line and are of adequate capacity to serve the development of the Property contemplated by the Buyer. 3.) Buyer shall have been able to conduct such soil tests, environmental _ _.; ., . .. . ... . b. .,, .1 - . -Li en ' its interest hereunder, the results of which shall be acceptable to Buyer in its sole discretion. 4.) Buyer shall have been able to determine the costs of the site for new construction and the feasibility of the proposed project based upon said costs and said costs are acceptable to Buyer in its sole judgement. 5.) Buyer shall have been able to make application to applicable governmental units and/or quasi governmental entities and to obtain any and all governmental or Quasi-governmental aid or subsidies necessary, in Buyer's • sole judgement, for development of the Property in an economically feasible manner. Mayor Duane.1dcCarty City Council Members October 12. 1998 Page 3 6.) Buyer shall have been able to enter into a net lease agreement with an anchor tenant of its choice on terms and conditions acceptable to Buyer in its sole discretion. 7.) Buyer shall have been able to obtain financing for the project on terms and conditions acceptable to Buyer in its sole discretion. S.) Buyer shall have entered into binding purchase agreements with the owners of certain adjacent property and can simultaneously close on the purchase of the Property and said adjacent parcels. 9.) Buyer shall have agreed to the fora of quit claim deed to be given by the Seller, which quit claim deed, Buyer agrees, shall contain restrictions which run with the land which prohibit the use ofthe Property as an adult bookstore, - adult movie theater,or massage parlor in each case whose business is the sale, rental or promotion of sexually explicit material acts or entertainment and to which admission is restricted due to age. 10.) In the event Buyer fails to.receive approval of the development of the Property at a public hearing, this Agreement may be terminated by eithe Seiler or Buyer. Buyer 01211 deposit Earnest Money in the form of cash or irrevocable letter of credit in the amount of Ten Thousand and NO/100 dollars ($10,000) in an escrow account with Old Republic Title Insurance Company. Earnest Money shall be refundable if Purchaser cancels the Purchase Agreement during Due Diligence Period and any Extension. EXTENstoN: Upon the expiration of the Due Diligence Period, provided Buyer has not closed or terminated the Purchase Agreement,Purchaser may extend the Due Diligence Period for three (2) periods of ninety (90) days by depositing additional Earnest Money in the form of cash or irrevocable letter of credit, in the amount of Five Thousand and NO/100 dollars ($5,000) in an escrow account. The Additional Earnest Money shall be non-refundable, but applicable to the purchase price. CLosING: Closing will occur (30)withindays of �nY expiration of Due Diligence Period and Extension, but not earlier than the vacation of present Edgwood Drive and reconstruction of Edgewood Drive to the permanent location. BROEER: Buyer shall be responsible for compensating Terry Moses in connection with this proposed sale. Manor Duane McCarty City Council Members October 12. 1998 110 Page 4 This is a Letter of Intent and shall not bind either party. Please return a signed original s Letter of Intent by November 11, 1998, at which time this offer shall expire. Thank you in advancof e for your consideration. Very truly yours, MERIDIAN PROPERTIES REAL ESTATE DEVELOP t ' LLC, a Minnesota limited liability compa . ./ OLD Development Company) By: / / I !V v •t/ Robert Cunningham Its: Vice President-Development AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED THIS DAY OF 1998. t. RHC:cst SELLER: By: Its: • h:•bob•mamd.weanmocam_an.i at: -: -- ANTHONY PROPERTIES Real Estate Development&Investment 12770 Coit Road,Sults 1170 • Dallas,Texas 75251 • (972)991-4484 • Pax(972)991-4494 October 26, 1998 Mr. Chuck Whiting VIA: Fax City Administrator City of Mounds View 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View, MN 55112 RE: Sale of city land at the northeast corner of new Edgewood Drive and Highway 10 Dear Chuck, Approximately a year ago, WendeII Smith met with you and Rick Topke. As part of that meeting, ' he discussed with you my desire to make an offer for the vacant city land that will be created with the realignment of Edgewood Drive. In that meeting, it was discussed that it was the position of the city that this land would be zoned office and a Request for Proposals would be sent out by city staff I have learned through Wendell that TOLD Development has made an offer to purchase this land and that it will be discussed at the next City Council meeting, tonight. It is also my understanding that they wish to put in a Walgreens and perhaps a restaurant which is a retail zoning. As I made my intentions to purchase this property known to you almost a year ago, and was told M• on this property. • We are presently negotiating with TOLD Development to put a Walgreens on our site at the corner of Long Lake Road and Highway 10. This land is in the PUD as retail. I would think that the city would want to have all land that is presently zoned retail developed before creating more retail land. We have worked with the city for over three years in getting the theatre project under way. At the present time, the theatre is under construction and we are doing the working drawings for our first office building, so that we can begin construction in the spring. I believe that our working relationship with the city has been a positive one and we wish to continue working on projects in Mounds View. Mr. Chuck Whiting October 26, 1998 Page 2 Please make my intentions known to the City Council so that we can become part of the bidding process for this land. Sincerely yours, R. Jay An RJAJrIg cc: Wendell Smith • A October 22, 1998 Mr. Rick Jopke City of Mounds View Regarding: Resignation from the Mounds View Planning Commission Please regard this note as my resignation from the Mounds View Planning Commission as of the above date. Although I have en- joyed the honor of serving on the Commission for the past two and one-half years I find, now, that I can't give enough time to it to make it fulfulling for me or useful to you. Mounds View is in good hands with the current Commission and I wish all of you the utmost best. I'll be at the polls, Cam, root- ing for you. Bruce, whatever elected office you run for you've got my vote. I'll miss all of you. Rick, I'll drop my Plan books off early next week. Thank you in advance for forwarding this to the Commission. Take care. Very sincerely, Bobbi Brooks i t Sd. 111 PLANNING COMMISSION MEMO To: Mounds View Planning Commission, From: Rick Jopke, Community Development Director Subject: Request for Extension of Comprehensive Plan Submittal Deadline Date: October 30, 1998 As I previously discussed with the Planning Commission, I have talked to Metropolitan Council staff members about the possibility of an extension to the December 31, 1998 deadline to submit an updated comprehensive plan. They indicated that over half of the communities in the metropolitan area have or will be requesting an extension. These extensions will range from two to nine months. Attached are the forms that the City will have to complete to request an extension. The City Council will also have to pass a resolution requesting the extension. The following would be a revised process and schedule for completion of the updated comprehensive plan. A draft plan will be completed by January 29, 1999. The Planning • Commission could then hold one or two community forums in February to present the draft to the community. The Planning Commission could hold a formal public hearing in March and recommend adoption by the City Council. The City Council could hold a public hearing in March or April and approve the updated Comprehensive Plan for submittal to the Metropolitan Council and adjacent communities in April or May. The Metropolitan Council then has 60 days to approve the plan or suggest changes. The City Council could then formally adopt the plan. Copies of information which I have received from the Metropolitan Council staff concerning extensions is attached for your information. I have also attached a copy of a resolution that the City Council will have to pass requesting the extension. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council pass a resolution requesting a 6 month extension to the deadline for submittal of an updated comprehensive plan and directing staff to complete and submit the necessary paperwork to the Metropolitan Council. N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV\PLANCOMM\10-30C-9.MEM A Metropolitan Council Working for the Region, Planning for the Future 7 moimmilimilmillommilli October 6, 1998 Rick Jopke Community Development Director City of Mounds View 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View,MN 55112-1499 RE: Request for Extension of Time to Complete Review and Amendment of Local Comprehensive Plans Dear Mr. Jopke: In response to your inquiries regarding a deadline extension for completing your comprehensive plans, I am enclosing a packet of information outlining the process that you will need to follow. State statutes provide the Metropolitan Council with the authority to grant extensions to local governments in order to complete or amend comprehensive plans, fiscal devices and official controls. As our information packet describes, we must receive from you a resolution from your governing board(model attached), a completed questionnaire (enclosed), and a timetable for completion of your plan. The information we require from you is critical to our effort to plan regional systems in your 410 area. In addition,your data, along with other cities' plans already submitted,will provide a clearer regional context within which to complete individual comprehensive plan reviews. If you have any questions regarding the form or the process for granting plan extensions, contact Guy Peterson your sector representative at 602-1418. Sincerely, r 41 Craig R. Rapp Director, Community Development Enclosures cc. Rick Packer,Metropolitan Council Representative District 10 Guy Peterson, Sector Rep Richard Thompson, Office of Local Assistance 1111 H:ILIBRARY\COMMU NDV\Beaver\Request98Extensionmaindoc..doc 230 East Fifth Street St.Paul,Minnesota 55 10 1-1 634 (612)291-6359 Fax 291-6550 TDD/TTY 291-0904 Metro Info Line 229-3780 _I.,,-,.--I fnnnrtrtnr!rr F,»nt.,"r•r • 1 REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF PLANNING PERIOD r Nam of community Date Responsible person Phone ( ) Fax ( ) The Council understands that since your plan is not ready for submission, this information is subject to change. Responding to these questions is intended to provide tentative information to the Council so that it can anticipate future land needs and plan for Metropolitan systems. Request:plan extension to (date) Anticipated date of submission to adjacent local governments Anticipated date of submission to the Metropolitan Council Are the community's forecasts of population,households and employment for 2020 different than those developed by the Metropolitan Council? Yes No Do not know (plena circle only one) If yes, what are the forecasts that the community will be using for its comprehensive plan? 2000 2010 2020 4110 Population Households Employment Are the community's housing goals for a mixture of single family detached and multi-family dwelling units in the period 1996 through 2020 different than those developed by the metropolitan council? Yes No • If yes,what are the community goals for multi-family? % • What are the community goals for single-family detached? % Are the community's wastewater flow projections for 2000,2010 and 2020 different than those developed by the metropolitan council? Yes No If yes, what are the wastewater flow projections for; 2000 2010 2020 What is the amount of vacant(developable) land within the current urban service area? Single-family residential acres Multi-family residential acres Commercial acres Industrial acres • Public and semi-public acres i Is there any underused land or land targeted for reuse as residential development? Yes No If yes, how many acres? Do you anticipate requesting to add more land to the MUSA? Yes No If yes, how much? When? How does this relate to accommodating the Council's forecasts? Are your transportation assumptions consistent with the information in the Council's system statement? Yes No If no,please explain Narrative; Please discuss the current status of your plan. How far along is it? Are you doing it in- house nhouse or using a consultant? If the later,who? (please use additional sheets as needed). 4110 HAUBRARYWOMMUNDV18uva1Roquat Rx&twuion of Planning Paiod.doc 1 RESOLUTION i RESOLUTION REQUESTING EXTENSION OF THE DECEMBER 31, 1998 DUE DATE FOR • REVIEW OF THE CITY (TOWNSHIP) OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR CONSISTENCY WITH AMENDED METROPOLITAN COUNCIL POLICY PLANS WHEREAS, state statutes(Minn. Stat.§473.175473.871 (1996)requires that cities(townships)review and revise their comprehensive plans for consistency with Metropolitan Council policy plans; and WHEREAS,the Metropolitan Council has amended its policy plans; and has provided system statements outlining Council policy relative to the city(township); and WHEREAS, the City(Township)of is required to review its comprehensive plan for consistency with the amended policy plans and to prepare a revised comprehensive plan for submission to the Metropolitan Council by December 31, 1998;and WHEREAS, the City(Township)of has scheduled and budgeted to complete a major review and update of its comprehensive plan by (date) ; NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED, that the City(Township)of requests that the Metropolitan Council grant the city(township) of a extension to the deadline to complete its comprehensive plan; circulate the revised document to the adjacent io governmental units and affected school districts for review and comment; and,following approval by the planning commission and after consideration by the city council(township board),submit the plan to the Metropolitan Council for review. The motion-for adoption of the foregoing resolution was introduced by , seconded by , and upon a vote being taken thereon,the following voted in favor thereof: , and the following voted against the same: WHEREUPON said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. • Resolution No. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS COUNTY OF ) I, the undersigned,being the duly qualified of the City(Township)of ,County of , State of Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have carefully compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes of a regular meeting of said held on the ,with the original thereof on file in . WITNESS MY HAND officially as such (title) this (date) . lbH:\I ibrary\co mmundv\exten984eso lution-exten98.doe Suggestions Regarding the Six Month Adjacent Government Review • The Land Planning Act (Minn. Stat. Sec. 473.175) requires that six months prior to submitting the comprehensive plan to the Metropolitan Council for review, the plan must be submitted to adjacent governments for review and comment. ➢ Adjacent governments include cities, townships, counties and school districts. > The"plan"means the most current draft available at the time of the adjacent community review. • The Metropolitan Council advises that at the time of adjacent government review, the community submit the draft plan to the Council for informal review and comment. • More recent law governing the local government review process limits the review periods to 60 days. It is the Council's position that this adjacent government review period is 60 days,not six full months. • We are suggesting to cities that they proactively pursue this adjacent government review and clearly spell out their expectations of their neighboring communities in a cover letter as they circulate the plan. • We would suggest that cover letters requesting adjacent government review include at least the following: > The names of all the other governments to whom the draft has been sent for this adjacent government review, and the dates of these requests. • A reminder that the government which you've asked to review the plan has only 60 days in which to provide review comments. > A statement that if you do not receive comment within 60 days you will assume no comments are forthcoming and you will proceed with your completion schedule. ➢ A proposed schedule of the important local public review steps remaining— public meetings,hearings and consideration by city council for submittal to the Metropolitan Council. ➢ A request that the reviewing adjacent government expedite a written response indicating they have received the draft plan for review and have no comments or issues with the plan if they in fact have no concerns with the document. • Keep copies of all your correspondence with adjacent governments regarding this six month review. • If in doubt, clarify specific matters with your own legal counsel. H:\I.IBRARYNCOMMUNDV‘GuyP042398sixmontluaview.doc r RESOLUTION NO. 111 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION REQUESTING A SIX MONTH EXTENSION OF THE DECEMBER 31, 1998 DUE DATE FOR REVIEW OF THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR CONSISTENCY WITH AMENDED METROPOLITAN COUNCIL POLICY PLANS WHEREAS, state statutes (Minn. Stat. 473.175-473.871 (1996) requires that cities review and revise their comprehensive plans for consistency with Metropolitan Council policy plans; and WHEREAS,the Metropolitan Council has amended its policy plans; and has provided system statements outlining Council policy relative to the city; and WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View is required to review its comprehensive plan for consistency with the amended policy plans and to prepare a revised comprehensive plan for submission to the Metropolitan Council by December 31,1998; and WHEREAS,the City of Mounds View has scheduled and budgeted to complete a major review • and update of its comprehensive plan by June 30, 1999; NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,that the City of Mounds View requests that the Metropolitan Council grant the City of Mounds View a six month extension to the deadline to complete its comprehensive plan; circulate the revised document to the adjacent governmental units and affected school districts for review and comment; and, following approval by the planning commission and after consideration by the city council, submit the plan to the Metropolitan Council for review. The motion for adoption of the foregoing resolution was introduced by seconded by , and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: , and the following voted against the same: WHEREUPON said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Duane McCarty, Mayor IDChuck Whiting, City Clerk/Administrator i •