06-27-2005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View EDA June 27, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 3 President Marty referenced page five of the report noting that it states The Bridges AUAR authorized by the City reviewed all transportation issues related to the proposed development of the site. He stated that as he read through the AUAR a question was raised as to what kind of traffic impacts this could have on the City. He stated that he believes it was stated this aspect of it was not really looked at or addressed. He stated that they are looking at County Road J, 35W, Highway 10 and Airport Road noting that the actual traffic impacts to the City south of Highway 10, if recalls, was not addressed in the AUAR. Mr. Backman explained that the AUAR focused on the site itself to determine how the traffic patterns are currently, and how they would proceed if there were a development on the site. He explained that it was determined that most of the traffic would be in terms of Highway 10 and 35W. He acknowledged that there was not traffic counts down south of the Highway 10. President Marty referenced the June 20th Public Hearing stating that this issue was expressed as a major concern by many of the residents. He stated that he too is very concerned as to the impact the additional traffic would have on the city adding that this aspect should be addressed. President Marty referenced page eleven, Item 3A, states retention, relocation, termination\acquisition of billboards leaseholds, noted five lines down it states that Clear Channel would pay the city $15,000 annually for each sign for years 1 to 10; $20,000 for each sign for years 11 to 20; $35,000 for each sign for years 21 to 30. He stated that it was his understanding that Clear Channel could walk at any time from the current agreement noting that if this is the potential why does it appear to be bottom –loaded. City Attorney Riggs confirmed that they did discuss the contents of the existing leases between the City and Clear Channel. He explained that it is not an issue that they could possibly walk without the City or EDA having a remedy. He assured the Commission that they would clearly have options noting that the bottom line is that the leases that exist now are valid and would continue on. He stated that any other lease they would have moving forward would be the same. He stated that any lessee could abandon the leased interest noting that this does not mean that the City does not have remedies available that could be pursued. He noted that the present lease does have this included, as would any other lease the city would enter into. President Marty clarified that his concern is that he could see how they could have more of a tendency to walk if they are paying $250,000 per year versus $35,000 per sign. Carol Mueller, 8343 Groveland Road, stated that she has been praying for the city regarding this decision. She stated that she is praying that certain individuals on the Council would not have to be reminded of their responsibility and their ethics. She stated that ethics is the best word she can use in regards to this noting that if she worked for a company that was going to receive a benefit from the sale of a property, whether or not the benefit would trickle down to her level or not, she would exclude herself from the vote. She stated that if she had a relative working for the