My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-22-1995
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Economic Development Commission (Disbanded)
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
06-22-1995
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/20/2018 6:19:28 AM
Creation date
8/1/2018 6:36:38 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV City Council
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
6/22/1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
113
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
HIGHWAY 10 CORRIDOR DRAFT PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN • <br /> INTRODUCTION • <br /> The Highway 10 Corridor Proposal is presented by the highway 10 subcommittee <br /> consisting of the following: <br /> • Peg Mountin - Economic Development Commission <br /> • Gary Stevenson - Planning Commission <br /> • Pam Star - Parks & Recreation Commission <br /> • Staff: Cathy Bennett, Paul Harrington, Mary Saarion <br /> _ The Highway 10 Committee was directed to present options for the development of <br /> the Highway 10 Corridor in Mounds View. The first step in this process was to review <br /> how other communities addressed corridor redevelopment. This enabled the <br /> committee to take the best strategies from each plan and apply them to Mounds <br /> View. The following corridor plans were reviewed. In addition, the committee took a <br /> bus tour of several community corridors. <br /> • Cedar Avenue - Apple Valley <br /> • Highway 13 - Burnsville <br /> • Highway 5 - Chanhassen <br /> • University Ave - Columbia Heights <br /> • Edinborough/Centennial Lakes - Edina • <br /> • Highway 3 - Hopkins <br /> • Old Highway 8 - New Brighton <br /> • County Road E - Vadnais Heights <br /> • Highway 61 -White Bear Lake <br /> There were three common elements in each redevelopment plan that were revealed <br /> by the committee. <br /> • Each plan contained specific designated areas of development. Those areas of <br /> development addressed land use, zoning, landscaping, environmental <br /> engineering and how the area fit into the entire corridor plan. <br /> • The other common element, with the exception of Apple Valley, was that they <br /> were developed with the assistance of an outside consultant who specializes in <br /> corridor and downtown redevelopment plans and community consensus <br /> building. <br /> • The final element is that redevelopment is a very slow, costly and risky process <br /> that takes strong local leadership. In addition, there is usually strong resistance <br /> to change and not everyone will agree with any plan since there are significant <br /> impacts to residents, businesses and traffic. Each City stressed the importance <br /> of remembering to keep focused on the big picture! <br /> • <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.