Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />'. <br />. <br /> <br />, l\~INUTES OF COUNCIL WORKSESSION OF 6/15/93 <br />PAGE TWO <br /> <br />Mr. Oertel informed the Council and Staff that the lumber costs have skyrocketed in the <br />past year and Council should be aware of the need to review potential costs for the City <br />Hall and Public Works facility. <br /> <br />Review of Snellinl!: Avenue Ril!:ht-of-Wav Vacation <br /> <br />City Engineer Teny Maurer provided Councilmembers and Staff with a handout <br />outlining the issues of city utilities, other utilities and the vacation process. He also <br />presented a map prepared by the Planner John Bergly which illustrates the impact on <br />properties abutting Snelling Avenue. <br /> <br />Mr. Chapman owns land adjacient to the ROWand would like the turnback of the <br />ROW, and made note that the City's Comprehensive Plan shows 80 feet for ROW. <br />Currently Old Snelling has a 200 ROW. Mr. Chapman suggested to the Council to <br />amend the Comprehensive Plan to change the ROW to 200 feet. their intention is to this <br />issue. Councilmembers and Staff were presented with a petition from residents in the <br />area stating their opposition to the Old Snelling Avenue turnback. <br /> <br />Review of Ramsev County Turnbacks <br /> <br />Terry Maurer informed the Councilmembers that Ramsey County has approximately <br />$800,000 to do improvements on turnback roads. Ramsey County would consider cold <br />recycling of County Road F in 1994 or 1995. The road would then be in an acceptable <br />condition for approximately 10 years. The County would also consider sealcoating Old <br />Snelling Avenue. Mr. Maurer will write a letter to Ramsey County and Municipal State <br />Aid offices to address current turnback questions. <br /> <br />Everest Group - Review proposed Developer's Al!I"eement of Gatewav Business District <br /> <br />Bill Franke and Rob Davidson presented their proposal of a Developer's Agreement. <br />Mr. Franke believes the agreement is consistent with the Concept Plan with modification <br />of the Gateway Business District zoning issues. He believes the City would have full <br />control of the 12 acres. <br /> <br />Councilmember Malone questioned Article IV relating to Tax Increment financing and <br />stating there seems to be no limitations addressed regarding the amount of financing <br />available. Mr. Franke stated basically it is a "pay as you go" concept. The limitations <br />are set by the value of the improvement which would only generate so many dollars. <br /> <br />Councilmember Malone also questioned III-6 and asked for clarification of why City <br />representatives could inspect progress only after receiving permission from the <br />Developer and needing to give the Developer prior notice. Mr. Franke stated this <br />statement broadens the rights of the City, it does not limit their rights. <br /> <br />Councilmember Malone referred to the last paragraph and Article V which states that <br />during the term of this agreement, the City will not create TIF for other developments. <br />Councilmembers Malone and Probst adamantly disagreed with this statement. The <br />Lexington/Fox area could be developed, as well as possibly the Control Data area. Mr. <br />Franke explained that these areas would be non-competition areas, but if the arsenal <br />property would become available for development, it would be in direct competition with <br />