Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. VonDeLinde responded that was something that could be pursued, but he did not know if <br />that was necessazy. <br />Ms. Sutherland, niece of property owner, stated her aunt's position had not changed. She noted <br />her aunt had not asked for this to happen and if it requires paperwork to cleanup what was out <br />there, then that should be done. She believed the fairest thing to do was to clean the records and <br />remove any future implication for her property. <br />Councilmember Elvig expressed concern that if the City. and/or the County had to go through a <br />comprehensive plan amendment, what was the time and expense it would incur. He believed the <br />memorandum would take care of this issue. <br />City Attorney Goodrich noted the Memorandum was not in recordable form so it would not go <br />on the land records. He noted the City and County had the right of eminent domain. <br />Councilmember Look believed the City was in a situation that he was not sure the City wanted to <br />be in. He noted the property owner was an elderly woman and this was both concerning and <br />stressful to her and probably not appropriate for her to be dealing with. He noted if mistakes had <br />been made in the past, they should be remedied in the way the landowner was comfortable with <br />and not the most expedient process, even if it took some time to get it done. <br />Motion by Councilmember Look, seconded by Councilmember McGlone, to deny the request to <br />enter into Memorandum of Understanding with Anoka County in regards to future land use and <br />zoning for 18055 Roanoke St NW. <br />Further discussion: Councilmember Jeffrey noted there would still be records in the public <br />record that this land could possibly be parkland at some point in the future. Councilmember <br />Elvig stated he had not heard of any other proposal and asked how the City would strike this as <br />pazkland. Mayor Ramsey noted the map could be changed. Councilmember Look noted he has <br />never seen the County's plan. Ms. Sutherland stated she believed the Memorandum was an <br />attempt to address an issue that should not have happened. She noted the County had previously <br />taken her aunt's land by eminent domain in the 1970's and her aunt was allowed to keep the <br />remaining five acres, which her aunt had built her home on. Councilmember Look believed the <br />issue was something dating back to the 1970's in which this resident was dealt with in a way not <br />well received and now that resident was dealing with this again. He stated he was opposed to <br />Memorandums of Understanding. Mayor Ramsey stated this was a difficult decision. He noted <br />a wrong had been done and it was necessazy to remedy the situation. He did not believe a <br />Memorandum of Understanding would remedy the situation. Councilmember Elvig expressed <br />concern the remedy would cost too much. Mayor Ramsey recommended the County hold a <br />public heazing to amend its comprehensive plan. He noted this was not that difficult. Mr. <br />Sutherland stated he did not know what the County or Metropolitan Council would do with <br />respect to this situation, but he did not think either entity would be excited going down this path. <br />Associate Planner Gladhill requested a separate motion asking the County to amend their plan <br />and go through the Metropolitan Council's process. City Administrator Ulrich expressed <br />concern about the timing. Mayor Ramsey requested a Resolution be prepared requesting the <br />County to remove this from the map. <br />City Council /July 27, 2010 <br />Page 7 of 11 <br />