My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-14-2005
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Economic Development Authority
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
02-14-2005
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/29/2025 9:14:49 AM
Creation date
8/6/2018 12:30:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
Economic Development Authority
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
2/14/2005
Commission Doc Number (Ord & Res)
0
Supplemental fields
Date
2/14/2005
EDA Document Type
Council Packets
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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 EDA September 27, 2004 <br />Regular Meeting Page 2 <br /> <br />stated that an accurate location of the parcel boundaries and topography is necessary to assure the 46 <br />end user that there are no gaps in ownership or encroachments. He stated the City Attorney in his 47 <br />September 7, 2004, Memo strongly recommended the City conduct a survey of all the property. 48 <br /> 49 <br /> 50 <br />Economic Development Coordinator Backman stated that five proposals have been received 51 <br />from qualified firms, ranging from $7,900 to $29,000, with E. G. Rud and Sons of Circle Pines 52 <br />submitting the lowest bid. He stated that Staff recommends authorizing them to conduct the 53 <br />boundary survey and elevations at a cost not to exceed $8,300. 54 <br /> 55 <br />Commissioner Quick asked whether this wasn’t done when the golf course was developed. 56 <br /> 57 <br />President Linke stated that he believed that it was, but that it was quite old, if it was. 58 <br /> 59 <br />Director Ericson stated that an exhaustive search had been conducted, and they had been unable 60 <br />to find any survey of the golf course. 61 <br /> 62 <br />Commissioner Quick asked why they didn’t have it. He stated that nobody has cared to put any 63 <br />money into a filing program so that everything could be kept track of. 64 <br /> 65 <br />Commissioner Stigney asked why they were recommending that it not exceed $8,300 instead of 66 <br />the$7,900 that had been quoted. 67 <br /> 68 <br />Economic Development Coordinator Backman stated that an additional amount is typically 69 <br />added in case there are additional costs that weren’t anticipated. He stated that he expects they 70 <br />will come in on budget, but if there is an unanticipated cost, it will be covered, and they generally 71 <br />add a couple of percent more to the figure. 72 <br /> 73 <br />Commissioner Quick asked whether they could sell that land, and that he was referring to the 74 <br />MnDOT property. 75 <br /> 76 <br />City Attorney Riggs stated that the City Staff is working on dealing with the right of reverter 77 <br />deed restriction. He stated that you can always quit claim deed something away, but whether 78 <br />somebody can develop it is another issue, and that to have clean title, there are obviously some 79 <br />steps that need to occur. 80 <br /> 81 <br />Commissioner Quick asked if there weren’t some strings attached to that piece from MnDOT. 82 <br /> 83 <br />City Attorney Riggs stated that that deed restriction was what he was referring to. 84 <br /> 85 <br />Commissioner Quick asked whether MnDOT has some say in whether they can sell that property 86 <br />or not. 87
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.