My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-04-2013 WS
MoundsView
>
City Council
>
City Council
>
Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2013
>
02-04-2013 WS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/26/2018 9:58:20 AM
Creation date
6/26/2018 9:02:17 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV City Council
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
2/4/2013
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
81
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
MjNUDS VfE-W <br />City of Mounds view Staff Report <br />Item No: 2 <br />Meeting Date: Feb 4 2013 <br />Type of Business: Work Session <br />To: Honorable Mayor and City Council <br />From: James Ericson, City Administrator <br />Item Title/Subject: Continued and Ongoing Discussion Regarding the County <br />Road 10 Corridor <br />Introduction: <br />The City Council added this issue as a standing agenda item for work sessions in 2013 <br />until some resolution is achieved or plan adopted relating to the Co. Road 10 Corridor. <br />Discussion: <br />At the January work session, the City Council reviewed the 2002 Corridor Improvement <br />plan and made recommendations regarding goals and objectives. In addition, the <br />Council discussed available unobligated TIF dollars and how much would be eligible for <br />enhancements and improvements in the corridor. Staff confirmed that, with very little <br />exception, TIF cannot be used for landscaping or other beautification efforts. Other <br />funding sources would need to be indentified for such purposes. <br />The Council also discussed utilization of TIF dollars for acquisition of parcels in <br />association with proposed or anticipated redevelopments within the Corridor. Real <br />estate acquisitions, site clearance, utility work are all eligible TIF expenditures. <br />In addition, the Council reviewed potential median enhancements such as berms <br />planted with trees. Originally Ramsey County indicated trees would not be acceptable <br />within the median for safety purposes. I had reported subsequently that the County <br />Engineer provided a contrary response which was interpreted to mean that trees <br />WOULD be permitted (such as what was done on Highway 96) however, apparently, <br />the corridor would first need to be converted to an "urban section" (with curbs and <br />gutter) to make this a reality—a very costly endeavor. <br />Finally, the Council requested copies of the 2006 Premium Stop Redevelopment plan <br />which is attached to this report. The Premium Stop plan illustrates redevelopment <br />scenarios on the south side of County Road 10 between County Road H2 and Woodale <br />Drive. <br />SIGNAGE UPDATE: <br />At the Jan 28, 2013 Council meeting, Mayor Flaherty reported that Bob Benke, <br />Research & Advocacy Services Director for the North Metro Mayors Association, would <br />be following up with MnDOT regarding the cost to replace signs on MnDOT controlled <br />corridors. While there is no response from that inquiry yet, I can add that I have <br />provided updates on the issue to Ramsey County Commissioners McGuire and <br />Huffman. I have suggested to both Commissioners that perhaps the County cover the <br />costs of replacing signs within the corridor. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.