Laserfiche WebLink
Economic Development Consultant Mulrooney replied no. <br /> <br /> Councilmember Zimmerman stated that he thought that some sort of use <br /> would be more attractive along Highway #10. <br /> <br /> Ci' Administrator Norman stated that since the anal sis is a sim 1e fil the <br /> ry Y P Y <br /> tried to determine what the other costs would be for the differen~;~ elopx <br /> yet <br /> noted that they could and together the other costs to th~ <br /> try <br /> put <br /> prior <br /> <br /> Councilmember Hendriksen stated that the industrial busin~i/~ay a ~. tax rate and have <br /> the lowest demand for services which is just the opposit~:~'~e~'~sidentio /~ ,pmmts. The one <br /> xssue that needs to be considered ~s the nver cros~'~.5.mad typlcall' ~ he sees a major <br /> highway crossing there 1s usually shopping malls et~:¥n~a~:,:ie~dent~al ~; ~d thinks that the <br /> . ~ ~'~;~ . ~ .::~ ~ .... <br /> City needs to plan around the assumption that there will be a ~j~r Late: t( in that <br /> Vlclmty. <br /> <br /> ..... ~ . <br /> C~ty Administrator Norman noted that the d~fficulty w~th attemptable ~ )~ce/commerc~al <br /> type in addition to an industrial development the City would need t0~'~ ~, i~'i~6~al housing in <br /> the area. ~~¢,~ ~ ~? <br /> <br /> Economic Development Constant Ma~ooney s~af~i'!~t..~.he visions ~' ~ of development <br /> that would servtce more of a commum~.~ather than ~r~gn ain, t He stated that the odds <br /> would be pretty small to have a regional g0~er m K~6y. <br /> "~i~. ' <br /> <br /> Consensus of the Councit was to contmue d~gibns with the"EDA regarding the issue. <br /> <br /> Economic Degel6pment Ai~rity Member ~ffg-n~:inoted that the EDA has a lot of the <br /> salile <br /> concerns re,aiding the assu~on that were u analysis. <br /> <br /> Councilmemb~ Hendrikserr:stated?that his~i concern is that after waiting numerous years for <br /> a river crossir~!i he,do%:: ~i5~::~:(~i:~!~11!;~5~; property to gas stations etc. when they are close to <br /> having very valu~l~[~'P[~perty. -'~"~ . <br /> <br /> c) ~Se'wer & Water Wekt~Ext~ion Feasibility Study <br /> <br /> City Administrator No~;,Stated that an analys~s was prepared to assist the City of Ramsey in <br /> evaluating th~i~%.sibility'~f~ constructing City sewer and water services tO the west border of the <br /> City Variou~?!ijandowners have expressed interest in expediting development upon the <br /> .,: ',:.~i .' . <br /> completion offlsewer and water services. He explained that certain types of development <br /> strategies onapproval gmdance by landowners and <br /> were:'used <br /> based <br /> and <br /> /or <br /> the <br /> individual <br />:¢d'evelopers:-? .rThe study compares the cost of construction against the revenues generated by <br /> Pr0Specfi. ge'development along the Highway # 10 corr/dor. The estimated cost of constructing the <br /> City...Sewer and water services from Ramsey Boulevard to the western border of Ramsey along <br /> theH4'ghway #10 corridor is $6,386,700. More than likely the extension of the <br /> services <br /> would <br /> be <br /> <br /> City Council/september 26, 2000 <br /> Page 3 of 5 <br /> <br />-49- <br /> <br /> <br />