My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_03135
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF3000 - PF3801
>
3100
>
pf_03135
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 12:43:26 PM
Creation date
12/8/2004 3:52:59 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
111
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />November 4, 1999 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />ordinance has a direct nexus or connection to the interest of lessening the <br />economic devastation imposed on displaced residents. <br /> <br />Other cities' ordinances. In 1997, the City of Burnsville passed its own park closing <br />ordinance, similar to Bloomington's ordinance. The League of Minnesota Cities confirmed <br />that Hopkins passed its park closing ordinance several years ago - Hopkins currently has no <br />manufactured home parks in the city limits. Apple Valley is scheduling public hearings to <br />review its park closing ordinance. The contact person is Richard Kelly, Apple Valley's <br />community development director. Our office understands you have some familiarity with the <br />aforementioned community. <br /> <br />Roseville proposed ordinance. The proposed ordinance IS similar to Bloomington's <br />ordinance. I make the following specific observations: <br /> <br />1. In Section 12, Payment of Additional Compensation, last sentence, require ninety (90) <br />days in contrast to the thirty (30) days length of time used in both the Burnsville and <br />Bloomington ordinances. The financial burden on the park owner is substantially <br />affected by the time period selected in this Section. <br /> <br />2. Section 14, Payment of Relocation Cost to Renters. Neither the state statute nor the <br />Bloomington and Burnsville ordinances compensate renters of manufactured homes. <br />Renters and owners are not similarly situated. Requiring compensation of both the <br />renter and the owner will cause the park owner to pay twice for the displacement of one <br />home. <br /> <br />3. The proposal does not contain the following provision: The total compensation to be <br />paid to displaced residents by the park owner and purchaser of the park shall not exceed <br />twenty percent of the purchase price of the park. Both the Burnsville and Bloomington <br />ordinances contain a twenty percent limitation on total compensation. This helps to <br />protect a park owner's investment. <br /> <br />Attached for your review are the following: <br /> <br />1. State statute, <br />2. Minnesota laws enacting the original statute and amendments in 1991 and 1997, <br />3. Burnsville ordinance, <br />4. Bloomington ordinance, and <br />5. Court of Appeals opinion in Arcadia Development. <br /> <br />Please contact us if you have any further questions or wish us to prepare a draft ordinance for <br />Council consideration. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.