My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2007/08/27
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
Agenda Packets - 2007/08/27
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:49:44 PM
Creation date
7/17/2018 3:35:41 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
8/27/2007
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
8/27/2007
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
209
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Mounds View City Council July 23, 2007 <br />Regular Meeting Page 12 <br /> <br />Council Member Mueller agreed the City should pursue acquisition further to determine what 1 <br />the actual cost would be. 2 <br /> 3 <br />Council asked whether there would be funding available to purchase the property. 4 <br /> 5 <br />Director Ericson explained that the City could use TIF funds, storm water utility fees, or Park 6 <br />Dedication fees to purchase the property. 7 <br /> 8 <br />Council Member Stigney said that the memo from Director Ericson suggested a joint purchase 9 <br />with Ramsey County and he would like to know if that was pursued. 10 <br /> 11 <br />Director Ericson indicated that he has not discussed that with them as of yet. 12 <br /> 13 <br />Council Member Stigney said that he would like Staff to ask whether the resident would be 14 <br />willing to donate the property for the tax credit. 15 <br /> 16 <br /> 2. Review Potential Parcel Acquisition at 2400 County Road H2 17 <br /> 18 <br />Community Development Director Ericson explained that Roberts Sports Bar has closed and 19 <br />Greg Waste is willing to work with the City on a potential acquisition. Mr. Waste has indicated 20 <br />that he would be interested in selling the property to the City with a lease back option, so that he 21 <br />could reopen his business, and the City would have control of the property as part of the 22 <br />redevelopment project. Mr. Waste has indicated that if there is an agreement to lease the 23 <br />property back to him, he would be willing to discount the sale price to the City. 24 <br /> 25 <br />Mayor Marty asked for an explanation of the one RFQ that came in. 26 <br /> 27 <br />Director Ericson explained that the City received an RFQ from Master Development with 28 <br />experience with infill developments and redevelopments in the metropolitan area. 29 <br /> 30 <br />Council Member Stigney said that he would like to make it known that Mr. Waste wants to sell, 31 <br />and let a developer with private dollars develop this site. 32 <br /> 33 <br />Mayor Marty explained that this property has been offered to the City, and that would allow the 34 <br />City to control the redevelopment of the site, rather than a simple sale that would continue a 35 <br />similar use of the property. 36 <br /> 37 <br />Council Member Flaherty said he would like to look into the options with this, and determine 38 <br />Mr. Waste’s price before making a decision. 39 <br /> 40 <br />Administrator Ulrich suggested an option on the property with a cash payment to hold the 41 <br />property for six months at an agreed upon price. 42 <br /> 43 <br />Council Member Mueller asked whether the City would need to be concerned about potential 44 <br />liability for purchasing the property and leasing it back to Mr. Waste. 45
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.