11-28-2005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View EDA November 14, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 6 comes down to the primary purchase of the property should be a developer, not the City. 212 However, the City is the primary entity to install the infrastructure. She stated the hindrance on 213 those properties may have been because of the City’s lack of infrastructure. So, during the next 214 two years as other investments are made, it may encourage development to take place that does 215 not require City involvement. 216 217 Commissioner Thomas stated the Premium Stop in Moundsview Square is a serious concern for 218 her but it is an independent property so the City has to wait for them to decide what they want to 219 do. She stated that issue along with the heart-of-the City issue puts the Skyline Motel acquisition 220 farther down on the list for her, even knowing about the public safety concerns. 221 222 Commissioner Flaherty stated he concurs and appreciates the EDC bringing these priorities 223 before the EDA. He stated he is in favor of controlling what the City can control. When dealing 224 with the County Road 10 corridor, it involves contractors and the County and is somewhat out of 225 the City’s control. However, City-wide road construction can be controlled by the City and there 226 are no restrictions standing in the City’s way. He stated that ties into the County Road 10 227 corridor and is a very large “piece of pie.” He stated his support to move on the development of 228 the City’s roads. 229 230 President Marty stated Director Ericson mentioned that excess TIF funds will have to be returned 231 if a project is not started before 2007 but he saw nothing about the trailway project on Silver 232 Lake Road, which will take $350,000 and up, depending on the wetland areas. He stated he is 233 still working with the County Commissioners in the City’s attempt to get a stop light at Silver 234 Lake Road and County Road H. 235 236 President Marty asked why that was not reflected in the list. Director Ericson stated that can be 237 added and the funding priorities re-tabulated. He noted there are several other projects that could 238 be added as well. 239 240 President Marty stated it could be used for street reconstruction but Ehlers & Associates had it 241 pegged out only six years. At the last meeting this issue was discussed, Public Works Director 242 Lee said the street reconstruction was about an 18-year project to get all the streets done. He 243 explained that his concern is that people within the next six years will get a $9 million break and 244 then after that residents will be assessed. He asked if the $9 million can be stretched out so every 245 resident gets a “piece of the pie.” 246 247 City Administrator Ulrich stated the likely scenario would be to leave the assessment to residents 248 the same but the 75% the City covers would not be taxed throughout the City. He agreed it 249 would be nice to find a way to ease that in since it is a long term project. 250 251 Commissioner Gunn stated she agrees that the City’s roads are the number one priority. 252 However, she does not want to lose sight of the County Road 10 project. She stated the trails 253