Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-10-2000PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW EDA CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Special Meeting October 10, 2000 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 8:01 P.M. CALL MEETING TO ORDER ROLL CALL: Coughlin, Stigney, Marty, Thomason and Quick. NOT PRESENT: None. 1. AGENDA ADDITIONS There were no additions or corrections to the agenda. MOTION/SECOND: Thomason/Marty. To approve the agenda as presented, dispensing with the reading of all ordinances and resolutions unless otherwise requested. Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 2. APPROVAL OF EDA MINUTES A. Approve Minutes of September 25, 2000. MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Quick. To approve the minutes of the EDA for September 25, 2000, as presented. Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 3. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS None. 4. CONSENT AGENDA None. Mounds View EDA October 10, 2000 Special Meeting Page 2 5. EDA BUSINESS A. Consideration of Resolution 00-EDA-135, a Resolution Adopting a Tax Abatement Finance Policy and Application. Economic Development Coordinator Parrish addressed the EDA and explained the resolution adopts the Tax Abatement Finance Policy and Application that was discussed in detail at last Monday’s Council Work Session. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Marty. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 00-EDA- 135, a Resolution Adopting a Tax Abatement Finance Policy and Application. Commissioner Marty noted this resolution sets a policy for tax abatement finance for the City but said the City would need to work with Ramsey County and the School Board to make it a viable policy. Commissioner Marty then asked Economic Development Coordinator Parrish if his comments on the policy were correct. Economic Development Coordinator Parrish said tax abatement proceeds can be used without a policy in place. The use of abatement proceeds is somewhat limited in that if it is a City only abatement being used for a public infrastructure a City only abatement is no different than levying the normal property taxes on that parcel of property. Therefore, pooling resources with another taxing jurisdiction would make more sense. Vice President Stigney clarified the desirable effect would be to have the City, County and the school district participate in the abatement. At the Work Session where this issue was discussed it was said the school district is not usually in favor of abating taxes but as he understands it, it is the desire to get all three entities to sign off on the policy. The policy right now leaves it up to the discretion of the Council to decide which entities they wish to try to enjoin into tax abatements. Economic Development Coordinator Parrish indicated Vice President Stigney’s statements were correct and said each project would have to be looked at to see what is appropriate for the situation. On some projects it would be desirable to have all three taxing jurisdictions on board and on other projects it is not necessary. It is up to the other taxing jurisdictions to establish their own policies for tax abatement. Commissioner Marty agreed with Vice President Stigney that in order to achieve the maximum benefit from tax abatement all three jurisdictions would need to approve the abatement. He then inquired as to whether the City is limited to a specific dollar amount for abatements. President Coughlin indicated the City is limited by statutory requirements. Mounds View EDA October 10, 2000 Special Meeting Page 3 Economic Development Coordinator Parrish indicated the City is limited to five percent of its levy or $100,000. Vice President Stigney inquired as to whether the $100,000 was per project or for the year. Economic Development Coordinator Parrish indicated the figure was overall for the year. Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. B. Consideration of Resolution 00-EDA-136, a Resolution Authorizing TIF Funds for the Installation of Trailway and Streetlight Improvements within the Highway 10 Corridor. Planner Ericson explained the resolution would appropriate a maximum of $82,500 in tax increment funds to install the trailway and streetlight improvements within the Highway 10 corridor for safety, aesthetic and redevelopment purposes. Planner Ericson noted the City is requiring substantial improvements to pedestrian and bicycle safety in the Highway 10 corridor. The Mermaid has agreed to extend the trailway through the Perkins property up to and terminating at the business park property. Staff would like to extend the trail to Wooddale Drive and Highway 10. This would require extending the trail an additional 550 feet. Staff would like to use the same decorative lighting as the City is requiring at the Mermaid development. The City required the developer to put in five lights at the Walgreen’s development which is a spacing of one per 200 feet. The City has since learned the lights really require spacing of one for 125 feet. If spaced 125 feet apart four additional lights would be needed. The City may possibly only need three depending upon where the first light starts. Staff has looked at the budget and there are funds available for the lighting. Staff received an estimate for the cost for the additional lights in the amount of $4,621. Staff has put together some numbers and estimates the cost for the trailway installation to be about $12 to $15 dollars per lineal foot for the nine-foot wide bituminous trailway. Considering the numbers Staff put together, a resolution approving an expenditure of $82,500 with a 5% contingency in case there is trouble with wiring or grading. Planner Ericson explained that the question before the EDA is whether or not the EDA would like to proceed with this and, if so, should three or four lights be installed. The $82,500 requested would allow for the addition of four lights in front of the Walgreen’s property. Planner Ericson said he was approached by the developer with regard to the undergrounding of the power lines. There was a requirement in the PUD that power lines along Edgewood Drive be relocated as this is a component of City Code. It has turned out the cost to relocate underground Mounds View EDA October 10, 2000 Special Meeting Page 4 utilities is significantly more than the developer had anticipated and the developer is requesting some type of cost sharing with the City. If the EDA were agreeable to this, Staff would recommend to participate in a way that it reduces any confusion as to who pays for what. If the EDA wants to contribute for the cost to do this perhaps the City could pay for the installation of the five street lights the City initially required the developer to put in. That amount would be $25,000. Planner Ericson advised there are two options. The first is to consider the resolution at the full amount of $82,500. The second option would be to approve the resolution less the amount of $25,000 which would represent the amount the City would be participating with the developer in on the Walgreen’s development. Vice President Stigney inquired if there were other lights that would cast more light than the lights proposed, thereby requiring fewer lights for the space. Planner Ericson indicated there are other less expensive lights the City could look at but said the lights in question are the same lights that were used on the trailway behind City Hall. They are the same lights that Council required the developer to install for the Walgreen’s development. They are decorative lights that were chosen to create more of a boulevard look. The City is under contract with NSP to install the lights along the trailway behind City Hall. Vice President Stigney asked if there would be an option to put a different head on the light to get more light out of them. Planner Ericson indicated it may be possible but he is not sure. Commissioner Marty noted the EDA chose the most aesthetically pleasing lights to create more of a boulevard look. He then asked if the matter could be researched with NSP to see if there are other options. Planner Ericson indicated the City needed to maintain consistency for the lighting on the trailway. He noted the City required the Mermaid to put in the same lights with the one per 125 feet ratio. Vice President Stigney asked for Staff’s recommendation on the issue. Planner Ericson recommended approval of Resolution 00-EDA-136 authorizing TIF funds in the amount of $82,500 at the one per 125 foot spacing. It allows for adding in the four lights in addition to the five already required. Staff will not recommend whether or not the City should participate in the cost for relocating the utilities. Mounds View EDA October 10, 2000 Special Meeting Page 5 MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Quick. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 00-EDA- 136, a resolution Authorizing TIF Funds for the Installation of Trailway and Streetlight Improvements within the Highway 10 Corridor not to exceed $82,500. Vice President Stigney inquired as to whether the Mermaid was required to pay for the lights along the trailway on the Mermaid property. He also inquired as to whether there were any other nine foot wide trails within the City. Planner Ericson indicated the Mermaid was required to pay for the lights on their property and indicated the trailway on the theater property is nine feet wide. Commissioner Marty noted the new County I trail is nine feet wide. President Coughlin noted the nine-foot width is the standard in order to accommodate snow removal equipment. Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 6. REPORTS No reports were considered. 7. ADJOURNMENT President Coughlin adjourned the meeting at 8:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Recorded and transcribed by: Joan Lenzmeier TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.