Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 2000/11/08Resolution 5483 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION CANVASSING ELECTION RESULTS OF THE NOVEMBER 8, 2000 GENERAL ELECTION Whereas, a general election was held November 7, 2000; and Whereas, the results of this election are as follows: MAYOR TOTAL VOTES Sherry Gunn 2609 Richard Sonterre 2835 COUNCIL MEMBER (4-year term) Daniel Freimuth 1418 Cameron Obert 1730 Gary Quick 2642 Roger Stigney 2471 COUNCIL MEMBER (2-year term) Mary Amirahmadi 878 Greg Johnson 1976 Barbara Thomas 2116 CITY CHARTER AMENDMENTS Shall the Mounds View City Charter be amended to: (a) change from the Mayor- Council Plan form of government to the Council-Manager Plan form of government; (b) change and clarify the general form of administration of the City to be that of a City Manager; and (c) amend all references to Clerk-Administrator to City Manager? Yes 2275 No 2935 Shall the Mounds View City Charter be amended to change the term of office for the office of mayor from a two-year term to a four-year term? Yes 2294 No 3205 Resolution 5483, p. 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Richard Sonterre is being certified as being elected Mayor of the City of Mounds View; Gary Quick and Roger Stigney have been elected to four-year terms on the City Council; and Barbara Thomas has been elected to fill the two-year unexpired term of Lynne Thomason. Adopted this 8th day of November, 2000 ATTEST: _______________________________ Dan Coughlin, Mayor (SEAL) _______________________________ Kathleen Miller, City Clerk-Administrator M:\MasterFiles\1999 thru 2010\2000\City Council\Work Session Packets\11-08-00\Agenda -- Work Session.doc CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION AGENDA Wednesday, November 8, 2000 6:00 p.m. Call to Order at 6:00 p.m. 1. Canvas the results of the November 7, 2000 election. 2. Start of the Work Session Agenda. Items Discussed Per Consensus ______ 3. Little Woods Discussion -- Jim Ericson ______ 4. Discussion of Possible TIF Plan Modifications -- Ehlers ______ 5. Discussion Regarding Proposed Ordinance 672 and Proposed Ordinance 675 – Jim Ericson ______ 6. Discussion of Golf Manager’s Contract – City Attorney Item No: 3 Meeting Date: November 8, 2000 Type of Business: WS WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing; CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor & City Council From: James Ericson, Planner Item Title/Subject: Discussion Regarding the Potential for Development within the Area Commonly Referred to as the “Little Woods” Date of Report: November 2, 2000 Background: The area referred to as the “Little Woods” is that area to the east of Long Lake Road, north of Sherwood Road, west of Edgewood Drive and south of Highway 10. (Refer to Figure 1. below.) In conjunction with the hydrological study done to assess the Golf Course open space, the little woods area was surveyed and monitored to determine where the wetlands are. The results of the study, performed by Peterson Environmental, Inc., indicate that a much larger area within the Little Woods would be available for development. Because of this, and because the City controls some of the parcels in this area, staff is seeking direction as to a potential course of action. Figure 1. Little Woods Study Area Little Woods Report November 2, 2000 Page 2 Discussion: Staff has prepared a number of graphics to present data relevant to the study area. The first graphic, labeled Figure 2, illustrates the parcels within the study area which are controlled by the City. The control (with the exception of 8283 Long Lake Road) is in the form of “Use Deeds” from Ramsey County for drainage and stormwater purposes. As long as the intended use does not change, the City retains control. If the use of the parcels changes, or is intended to change, the City loses it’s right to “use” them. However, if the City so desires, it can purchase the properties outright from the County at a value determined by the County, before any other party has an opportunity or right to do so. Also on Figure 2, the outline of the original wetland boundary is shown in contrast to the new boundary as recently delineated by Peterson Environmental. It is evident that a number of parcels that were previously thought to be undevelopable due to the assumed presence of wetlands are now available, subject of course to the suitability of soils for development. As many as 14 of the platted parcels could be developed under the existing parcel and street configuration. Figure 2. Little Woods Report November 8, 2000 Page 3 Background on 8283 Long Lake Road and the HRP Program: The City purchased the property at 8283 Long Lake Road in March of 1997 at a cost of $50,500. (As can be seen in Figure 4, the value of the land alone has increased almost to what the City initially paid for the land and the house.) Since that time, staff has been before the Council/EDA on more than one occasion regarding the long range plan for this property, the consensus being to not market the lot on its own, but rather to retain the property and market it as a component of a much larger development. From these meetings with the Council, staff had been directed to explore purchasing the adjoining properties, which are currently used as rental dwellings by their respective owners. The homes are very small and could be considered “blighted” under the criteria established in the HRP guidelines. (Refer to Figure 3.) The current HRP guidelines however restrict purchases to owner-occupied homes only, due in large part to the cost of the relocation benefits to which the City would be subject. The alternative would be to use the City’s lot as an incentive for a developer to purchase and redevelop the adjoining parcels. Before this type of scenario can move forward, however, the development potential along unimproved Woodlawn and Laport Drives must be determined. The recently completed hydrological study answers this question to a large extent. Figure 3. Little Woods Report November 8, 2000 Page 4 Staff included with this report Figure 4, a map illustrating the wide-ranging land values associated with the undeveloped parcels. The assessed values of the three blighted properties are included as well, however their values represent both the land and home assessed values. It should be noted that that values represented on this map are not indicative of what it would take to purchase them outright. For example, the city-controlled lot south of unimproved Laport Drive is shown with an assessed value of $3,500. Staff contacted Ramsey County last year to inquire about a possible purchase of that lot and was told (at that time) the cost to purchase would be approximately $11,000. The privately held lots, which have minimal assessed values, would in all likelihood be appraised significantly higher, especially in light of the recent wetland delineation. Figure 4. If development is to occur, and it appears likely now that it could, it would seem prudent that the City should strive for the design that would maximize potential while minimizing the environmental impacts. The wetlands, woods and meadow prairies are a very desirable amenity, all of which could be compromised to some degree with uncontrolled development or development utilizing the existing 1940s-era plat. Using new and innovative site design principles and guidelines, it would seem possible to preserve and enhance the existing environmental features while allowing for low- density, upscale single-family home construction. Little Woods Report November 8, 2000 Page 5 The following map (Figure 5.) represents one development scenario that attempts to integrate the wetlands as an integral feature of the subdivision. Figure 5. The above concept plat is simply one example of how the area could be developed in harmony with the wetland. Before this or any other potential subdivision would be possible, at a minimum, a comprehensive testing of the soils would need to be done to determine suitability for not only the homes, but also the proposed streets. Engineering standards require a minimum of one soil boring every 300 feet of roadway and probably one boring per lot at the anticipated building setback line. Assuming an estimated 2,100 feet of street right of way, 7 soil borings would be required. Staff contacted Rocky Keehn at SEH, Inc., the City’s engineering firm, who indicated that the cost to perform the borings for the roadway and to analyze the results would be approximately $2,500. Plat Highlights: This plat scenario contemplates the addition of 34 lots for development, assuming the lots can be developed (i.e., soil corrections are either minimal or unnecessary). The total acreage of the plat is approximately 23 acres with 5.5 of that being wetland. The remaining area is 17.7 acres for a density of 2 units per acre. Figuring in the Little Woods Report November 8, 2000 Page 6 area set aside for street right of way, the density becomes 2.34 units per acre. (In comparison, the minimum lot size in Mounds View is 11,000 square feet, which translates into a density of 3.96 units per acre.) The value of these lots, given the tree coverage and other natural amenities, could be as much as $50,000 or more. Altogether, the 34 lots could be valued at 1.7 million dollars. This plat scenario is based on a number of assumptions. First, the two blighted rental homes would be removed in this development and two additional lots with existing homes (8247 Long Lake Road and 8133 Woodlawn Drive) would be subdivided. In addition to those four lots, there are eight other privately held lots which would need to be purchased or whose owners would need to sign off on the plat and be compensated in some other way, such as by retaining control over one or more of the replatted lots. As mentioned previously in this report, if the City wishes to utilize those lots for which it holds use deeds, it could anticipate paying triple the assessed value to purchase the lots. Given that assumption, the City could anticipate paying as much as $578,000 to acquire the rights to develop the County parcels. To offset that potential cost, staff would explore other various funding and grant options. One of the keys to this or any replatting of this area would be to preserve as much of the natural area as possible. The contour of the proposed road follows the contour of the wetland yet is setback a minimum of 125 feet. All of the home sites east and north of the proposed street would fall within the wetland buffer, thus precautions would need to be implemented to protect and preserve the wetland. Trees and the wooded areas would be preserved to every extent possible, clearing only those areas necessary for soil corrections and construction. The other key to this or any development is to make it pedestrian friendly and to emphasize and showcase the natural areas without detracting from or spoiling their aesthetic beauty and function. A pathway is shown along the north side of the proposed street as well as connecting to Sherwood Drive and Long Lake Road by pathway extensions. A pathway could be added to the north side of the wetland as shown on the plat to connect Ardan Park to the new development and to the neighborhoods to the south and east. Tax Base Impacts: Any development in this area would of course have a positive impact to the City’s tax base. Currently, the eight privately-held undeveloped parcels annually contribute a cumulative $22 to the City in property taxes. The other parcels over which the City holds use deeds generate no property taxes. Based on the above plat scenario with 34 lots, assuming minimum assessed values of $150,000 per lot (could be higher), the amount of taxes annually generated for the City would be $17,204 based on 2000 assessment rates. Public Input: For a subdivision of this scale, it would be very important to involve the adjoining residents in every step of the process. It would be staff’s recommendation to hold a public meeting, open to everyone having an interest in the development, once some Little Woods Report November 8, 2000 Page 7 of the unknown variables have been addressed, such as soils suitability. Staff would also make an attempt to personally meet with those property owners directly impacted by any potential development, especially those property owners having the most to gain or lose from the development. It would make sense that participation of all affected property owners would be necessary to make this or any type of development worthy of additional consideration. In terms of adjoining property owners not directly impacted by the subdivision, (i.e., those property owners south of 8247 Long Lake Road), their voice and opinions would be of utmost concern, yet the property owners behind them fronting unimproved Woodlawn Drive (Jeff Malmgren, for one) cannot be denied an opportunity to build on their lots. Thus, to achieve the best design scenario, staff would entertain input from all parties to promote consensus among the neighborhood residents. Recommendation: Staff is seeking feedback from the Council regarding potential development within the “Little Woods” area. If the Council supports the concept of a low-density development, staff would ask that it be directed to arrange for soil borings to better assess the feasibility. If the results of the soil borings indicate that development is possible, staff would like to be able to contact metro area developers to informally assess their interest in the opportunity to work with the City to creatively design and implement an environmentally sensitive subdivision worthy of the community’s support and region’s recognition. _____________________________________ James Ericson, Planner Item No: 5 Meeting Date: November 8, 2000 Type of Business: WS WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing; CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor & City Council From: James Ericson, Planner Item Title/Subject: (A) Discussion Regarding Proposed Ordinance 672, an Ordinance Amending Section 1106.03 of the Mounds View Zoning Code Pertaining to Home-Based Businesses. (B) Discussion Regarding Proposed Ordinance 675, an Ordinance Rezoning Properties Associated with the Mermaid Planned Unit Development from B-3 to PUD. Date of Report: November 2, 2000 Discussion: Ordinance 672: This ordinance has been drafted to clean up Section 1106.03 of the Mounds View Zoning Code pertaining to Home Based Businesses. The Planning Commission reviewed this ordinance at its last two meetings, adopting Resolution 641-00 on November 1, 2000, which recommends approval of the ordinance. There are two housekeeping changes to the ordinance and two changes of substance. The first change of substance relates to allowable signage. The Code currently allows for one-square foot of signage, which was felt to be too restrictive. This has been increased to four square feet, placement of which can occur either on the house or garage, or within five feet of a street right of way. The other change contemplated by this ordinance is that the limitation of no more than two cars for either on or off street parking has been changed to no more than two cars for on street parking, dropping the off street limitation. The Planning Commission also considered an amendment to the Code which would have added an item “h” to the ordinance, stating that home businesses involving automotive sales, service or repair would be expressly prohibited. In the end, the Planning Commission felt this was too broad a restriction and that the City’s Nuisance Codes would address most automotive uses so the amendment was deleted from the ordinance. Ordinance 675: On October 10, 2000, the City Council adopted Resolution 5476, a resolution approving the PUD for the Mermaid which also directed staff to prepare an ordinance to effectuate the rezoning from B-3 to PUD. Ordinance 675 does just that. The Planning Commission reviewed this ordinance on November 1, 2000 and passed Resolution 640-00, which recommends approval of the ordinance. Readings & Hearings: Both ordinances are scheduled to have their first introduction and first reading on November 13, 2000. At that meeting, the public hearings would be set for the November 27th Council meeting to coincide with the second reading and adoption. Recommendation: (A) Discuss the changes contemplated by Ordinance 672 regarding home occupations and advise staff as to whether additional changes are necessary prior to first reading on November 13. (B) Review Ordinance 675, the ordinance which rezones the properties associated with the Mermaid Planned Unit Development from B-3 to PUD. _____________________________________ James Ericson, Planner Attachments: 1. Ordinance 672 2. Ordinance 675 3. Resolution 640-00 4. Resolution 641-00 S:\DATA\USERS\JIME\SHARE\City Council Stuff\Misc Reports\Ord 672 & 675 Report.doc ORDINANCE NO. 672 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1106.03, SUBDIVISION 3, OF THE MOUNDS VIEW ZONING CODE, PERTAINING TO HOME-BASED BUSINESSES WITHIN THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Chapter 1106, Section 1106.03, Subdivision 3 of the Mounds View Zoning Code is hereby amended with additions underlined and deletions struck out to read as follows: Subd. 3. Home Occupations: The regulation of home occupations within residential structures is intended to ensure insure that the occupational use is clearly accessory or secondary to the principal dwelling use and that compatibility with surrounding residential uses is maintained. No home occupation shall be allowed which: a. Involves employees other than persons residing on the premises; b. Involves alteration or construction features not customarily found in dwellings; c. Has an exterior display or sign in excess of four one square feet foot. Such sign, for identification purposes only, shall be located either on the principal structure structured or garage, or mounted on the property within five (5) feet of a street right of way, so long as the sign or parts thereof do not extend beyond the property’s borders. Any sign existing prior to December 29, 1972, shall not be enlarged but may be continued at the size and location upon such date, except as hereinafter specified or subsequently amended. Any sign erected after December 29, 1972, but prior to the effective date hereof shall come into compliance herewith by April 1, 1983; d. Involves exterior storage of equipment or materials; e. Generates more than two (2) motor vehicles at a time for either off-street or on-street parking; f. Results in violation of the provisions of Chapter 607 604, Nuisances, of the Municipal Code; and g. Involves activity visible from the public streets. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall go into effect thirty (30) days after it has been published in the official City newspaper. First read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View on this ____ day of ____, 2000. Ordinance 672 Page 2 Read and passed by the City Council of the City of Mounds View on this ____ day of ____, 2000. Dan Coughlin, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen Miller, City Clerk / Administrator (SEAL) APPROVED AS TO FORM: _______________________________ Robert C. Long, City Attorney MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 641-00 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE 672, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 1100, CHAPTER 1106, REGARDING HOME- BASED BUSINESSES; SPECIAL PLANNING CASE SP-083-00 WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed proposed Ordinance 672, an ordinance amending Section 1106.03, Subdivision 3 (Home Occupations) of the Mounds View Zoning Code pertaining to home-based businesses; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission, after significant discussion, believes the proposed ordinance to be in the best interest of the community and is in keeping with the overall spirit and intent of the Mounds View Municipal Code; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission asserts that the proposed ordinance is consistent with the land use goals and policies addressed in the Mounds View Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends to the Mounds View City Council adoption of proposed Ordinance 672. BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Planning Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 1sth day of November, 2000. __________________________________________ Jerry Peterson, Chairperson ATTEST: __________________________________________ Rick Jopke, Community Development Director (SEAL) E:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV\SPECPROJ\SP083-00\RESOLUTION 641-00.DOC ORDINANCE NO. 675 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A REZONING OF PARCELS ASSOCIATED WITH THE MERMAID PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FROM B-3 (HIGHWAY BUSINESS DISTRICT) TO PUD (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT) THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Appendix A of the Mounds View Municipal Code entitled “Specific Rezonings” is hereby amended to include reference to the following Ordinance 675. Subdivision 1. Purpose. The Mounds View City Council has determined that to further economic development and organized land use controls that the present zoning classification of certain parcels should be reclassified to be consistent with the Mounds View Zoning Code and the proposed Mounds View Comprehensive Plan. Subdivision 2. The City’s official Zoning Map as shown in Exhibit A and the zoning classification for the following legally-described parcels are hereby changed from B-3, Highway Business, to PUD, Planned Unit Development: Tract A: (Mermaid Parcel) That part of the East 546.75 feet of the South 715.10 feet of the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 8, Township 30, Range 23 in Ramsey County, Minnesota lying Southwesterly of the Southwesterly right of way line of U.S. Highway No. 10 as it is now laid out and traveled and lying Northerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the West line of the East 546.75 feet of said SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 distant 445.25 feet North of the South line of said SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 as measured along said West line of the East 546.75 feet thereof; thence North 86 Degrees 52 Minutes 52 Seconds East (assumed bearing of the West line of East 546.75 feet of said SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 is North 0 Degrees 47 Minutes 11 Seconds West), and to the Southwesterly right of way line of said U. S. Highway No. 10 and except that part of the following described property included in the above described tract: Commencing at a point on the South line of the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of said Section 8 distant 897.5 feet West of the Southeast comer thereof; thence North 35 Degrees 07 Minutes West (assumed bearing of West on said South line) a distance of 392.7 feet to the center line of County Road H; thence South 54 Degrees 53 Minutes West along said center line, a distance of 145.0 feet to the point of beginning; thence continuing South 54 Degrees 53 Minutes West 120.0 feet; thence North 35 Degrees 07 Minutes West 252.0 feet; thence North 54 Degrees 53 Minutes East, 190.0 feet to the Southwesterly right of way line of Trunk Highway No. 10; thence, South 35 Degrees 07 Minutes East along said Southwesterly right of way line 200.0 feet; thence South 54 Degrees 53 Minutes West along said right of way line 70.0 feet; thence South 35 Degrees 07 Minutes East along said right of way line 52.0 feet to the point of beginning. Ordinance 675 Page 2 Tract B: (Mermaid Parcel) That part of the East 546.75 feet of the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 8, Township 30, Range 23 in Ramsey County, Minnesota lying Southwesterly of the Southwesterly right of way line of U. S. Highway No. 10 as it is now laid out and traveled, lying Northerly of the center line of County Road H and lying Southerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the West line of the East 546.75 feet of said SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 distant 445.25 feet North of the South line of said SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 as measured along said West line of the East 546.75 feet thereof; thence North 86 Degrees 52 Minutes 52 Seconds East (assumed bearing of the West line of the East 546.75 feet of said SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 is North 0 Degrees 47 Minutes 11 Seconds West) and to the Southwesterly right of way line of U. S. Highway No. 10 and said line there terminating and except that part of the following described property included in the above described tract: Commencing at a point on the South line of the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of said Section 8 distant 897.5 feet West of the Southeast comer thereof; thence North 35 Degrees 07 Minutes West (assumed bearing of West on said South line) a distance 392.7 feet to the center line of County Road H; thence South 54 Degrees 53 Minutes West along said center line, a distance of 145.0 feet to the point of beginning; thence continuing South 54 Degrees 53 Minutes West 120.0 feet; thence North 35 Degrees 07 Minutes West, 252.0 feet; thence North 54 Degrees 53 Minutes East, 190.0 feet to the Southwesterly right of way line of Trunk Highway No. 10; thence South 35 Degrees 07 Minutes East along said Southwesterly right of way line 200.0 feet; thence South 54 Degrees 53 Minutes West along said right of way line 70.0 feet; thence South 35 Degrees 07 Minutes East along said right of way line 52.0 feet to the point of beginning. Subject to County Road H. Tract C: (Rent All Property) A tract of land being a part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter and also a part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 8, Township 30, Range 23, Ramsey County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the South line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter distance 897.5 feet West of the Southeast comer thereof; thence North 35 degrees 07 minutes West (assumed bearing on said South line) a distance of 392.7 feet to the extension Northeasterly of the centerline of County Road H; thence South 54 degrees 53 minutes West along said center line a distance of 145.0 feet to the point of beginning; thence continuing South 54 degrees 53 minutes West 120.0 feet; thence North 35 degrees 07 minutes West 252.0 feet; thence North 54 degrees 53 minutes East 190.0 feet to the Southwesterly right of way line of Trunk Highway No. 10; thence South 35 degrees 07 minutes East along said Southwesterly right of way line 200.0 feet; thence South 54 degrees 53 minutes West along said right of way line 70.0 feet; thence South 35 degrees 07 minutes East along said right of way line 52.0 feet to the point of beginning. Tract D: (Music Off 10) The east 100.00 feet of the West 657.57 feet of the South 215 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 8, Township 30, Range 23, according to the U.S. Government Survey thereof, Ramsey County, Minnesota. Ordinance 675 Page 3 SECTION 2. This ordinance is effective thirty days after its publication. Read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this 13th day of November, 2000. Read and passed by the City Council of the City of Mounds View on this 27th day of November, 2000. _______________________________________ Dan Coughlin, Mayor ATTEST _______________________________________ Kathleen Miller, City Clerk-Administrator (SEAL) APPROVED AS TO FORM: _______________________ City Attorney V:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV\DEVCASES\Mermaid Hotel (ZC00-003, DE00-003, MA00-002)\Ordinance 675 - Rezoning.doc MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 640-00 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A REZONING OF PROPERTIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE MERMAID PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FROM B-3 (HIGHWAY BUSINESS) TO PUD (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT) WHEREAS, Daniel Hall, President of The Mermaid, has requested approval of a planned unit development (PUD) to expand the existing Mermaid complex by adding a hotel and banquet center; and, WHEREAS, on October 4, 2000, the Planning Commission approved Resolution 637-00, a resolution recommending to the City Council approval of the proposed Mermaid Planned Unit Development; and, WHEREAS, one of the requirements of a PUD is to rezone the properties associated with the development from their existing zoning designation to the PUD designation; and, WHEREAS, the legal descriptions for the properties to be rezoned from B-3 to PUD are as follows: (See attached EXHIBIT A.) WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed Comprehensive Plan for the City of Mounds View and finds that the proposed rezoning to PUD would be consistent with the indicated “Regional Commercial Planned Unit Development” land use designation; and, WHEREAS, the proposed rezoning would be consistent with the intent of Chapter 1120 of the Mounds View Zoning Code, Planned Unit Developments, which strives for the grouping of land parcels for coordinated and integrated development. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt Ordinance 675, an ordinance rezoning the above-described properties from B-3 to PUD. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission directs Staff to forward this Resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 1st day of November, 2000. Resolution 640-00 Page 2 ______________________________ Jerry Peterson, Chairperson ATTEST: ______________________________ Rick Jopke, Community Development Director (SEAL) V:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV\DEVCASES\MERMAID HOTEL (ZC00-003, DE00-003, MA00-002)\RESOLUTION 640-00 (REZONING).DOC EXHIBIT A. (Resolution 640-00) Tract A: (Mermaid Parcel) That part of the East 546.75 feet of the South 715.10 feet of the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 8, Township 30, Range 23 in Ramsey County, Minnesota lying Southwesterly of the Southwesterly right of way line of U.S. Highway No. 10 as it is now laid out and traveled and lying Northerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the West line of the East 546.75 feet of said SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 distant 445.25 feet North of the South line of said SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 as measured along said West line of the East 546.75 feet thereof; thence North 86 Degrees 52 Minutes 52 Seconds East (assumed bearing of the West line of East 546.75 feet of said SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 is North 0 Degrees 47 Minutes 11 Seconds West), and to the Southwesterly right of way line of said U. S. Highway No. 10 and except that part of the following described property included in the above described tract: Commencing at a point on the South line of the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of said Section 8 distant 897.5 feet West of the Southeast comer thereof; thence North 35 Degrees 07 Minutes West (assumed bearing of West on said South line) a distance of 392.7 feet to the center line of County Road H; thence South 54 Degrees 53 Minutes West along said center line, a distance of 145.0 feet to the point of beginning; thence continuing South 54 Degrees 53 Minutes West 120.0 feet; thence North 35 Degrees 07 Minutes West 252.0 feet; thence North 54 Degrees 53 Minutes East, 190.0 feet to the Southwesterly right of way line of Trunk Highway No. 10; thence, South 35 Degrees 07 Minutes East along said Southwesterly right of way line 200.0 feet; thence South 54 Degrees 53 Minutes West along said right of way line 70.0 feet; thence South 35 Degrees 07 Minutes East along said right of way line 52.0 feet to the point of beginning. Tract B: (Mermaid Parcel) That part of the East 546.75 feet of the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 8, Township 30, Range 23 in Ramsey County, Minnesota lying Southwesterly of the Southwesterly right of way line of U. S. Highway No. 10 as it is now laid out and traveled, lying Northerly of the center line of County Road H and lying Southerly of the following described line: Beginning at a point on the West line of the East 546.75 feet of said SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 distant 445.25 feet North of the South line of said SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 as measured along said West line of the East 546.75 feet thereof; thence North 86 Degrees 52 Minutes 52 Seconds East (assumed bearing of the West line of the East 546.75 feet of said SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 is North 0 Degrees 47 Minutes 11 Seconds West) and to the Southwesterly right of way line of U. S. Highway No. 10 and said line there terminating and except that part of the following described property included in the above described tract: Commencing at a point on the South line of the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of said Section 8 distant 897.5 feet West of the Southeast comer thereof; thence North 35 Degrees 07 Minutes West (assumed bearing of West on said South line) a distance 392.7 feet to the center line of County Road H; thence South 54 Degrees 53 Minutes West along said center line, a distance of 145.0 feet to the point of beginning; thence continuing South 54 Degrees 53 Minutes West 120.0 feet; thence North 35 Degrees 07 Minutes West, 252.0 feet; thence North 54 Degrees 53 Minutes East, 190.0 feet to the Southwesterly right of way line of Trunk Highway No. 10; thence South 35 Degrees 07 Minutes East along said Southwesterly right of way line 200.0 feet; thence South 54 Degrees 53 Minutes West along said right of way line 70.0 feet; thence South 35 Degrees 07 Minutes East along said right of way line 52.0 feet to the point of beginning. Subject to County Road H. Exhibit A (Resolution 640-00) Page 2 Tract C: (Rent All Property) A tract of land being a part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter and also a part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 8, Township 30, Range 23, Ramsey County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the South line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter distance 897.5 feet West of the Southeast comer thereof; thence North 35 degrees 07 minutes West (assumed bearing on said South line) a distance of 392.7 feet to the extension Northeasterly of the centerline of County Road H; thence South 54 degrees 53 minutes West along said center line a distance of 145.0 feet to the point of beginning; thence continuing South 54 degrees 53 minutes West 120.0 feet; thence North 35 degrees 07 minutes West 252.0 feet; thence North 54 degrees 53 minutes East 190.0 feet to the Southwesterly right of way line of Trunk Highway No. 10; thence South 35 degrees 07 minutes East along said Southwesterly right of way line 200.0 feet; thence South 54 degrees 53 minutes West along said right of way line 70.0 feet; thence South 35 degrees 07 minutes East along said right of way line 52.0 feet to the point of beginning. Tract D: (Music Off 10) The east 100.00 feet of the West 657.57 feet of the South 215 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 8, Township 30, Range 23, according to the U.S. Government Survey thereof, Ramsey County, Minnesota.