Agenda Packets - 1997/02/24 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

BRIGGS avn MORGAN - Samantha Orduno Cathy Bennett • July 21, 1995 Page 2 • On May 9, 1994, the Mounds View Economic Development Authority and the City Council approved a document which is entitled in part "Mounds View Economic Development Project". This consolidated all of the City's pre-existing three Development Districts and their Tax Increment Financing Districts and expanded the development area to include the entire City of Mounds View. In addition, there were significant amendments made to the old Development Programs, now known collectively as the "Project Plan" for this entire development/tax increment structure. Included within those goals and objectives were public utilities, infrastructures and transportation systems, together with facilities deemed desirable for the integration of the community and the development overtures. This provided a very broad and ample framework within which to proceed with any number of improvements, as and when approved by the Board of Commissioners of the Mounds View Economic Development Authority. The underlying statute here includes the Minnesota Municipal Development District Act, which is now found in Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.124 through 469.134. Although I don't think this is crucial, that statute is particularly well-suited to this type of improvement because it includes among its goals and public purposes the protection of"pedestrians from vehicle traffic" and the provision of"necessary linkage between peripheral parking facilities • and places of employment and shopping". This statute also refers to "pedestrian skyway systems" as systems for"providing for pedestrian traffic circulation,mechanical or otherwise, elevated aboveground, within and without the public right-of-way, and through or above private property and buildings, and includes overpasses, bridges, passageways, walkways, concourses, hallways, corridors, arcades, courts, plazas, malls, elevators, escalators, heated canopies and accesses and all fixtures, furniture, signs, equipment, facilities, services and appurtenances which in the judgment of the governing body of the city will enhance the movement, safety, security, convenience, and enjoyment of pedestrians and benefit the city and adjoining properties." I understand that this bridge would probably provide an important linkage between shopping and other facilities, would now or in the future possibly integrate with connection paths or other pedestrian parkways, and would provide other, perhaps more aesthetic and "community image" benefits. Assuming that the EDA Board believes that these or perhaps other such "public purposes" within the meaning of the adopted Project Plan and underlying statute would be served by this project and the expenditure of some tax increment financing dollars to complete it, I think this would be very defensible as an appropriate use of tax increment. If the Board wishes to go ahead with this, I do think it is advisable to do so by written resolution which would provide the authorization and findings of the type discussed above, IP and I would be happy to work with you on preparing that should you so desire.