09-14-2016 Workshop Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

STAFF REPORT TO: Mayor Keis and Members of City Council FROM: Joel Hanson, City Administrator DATE: September 9, 2016 RE: Information Update Workshop For the Information Update Workshop, here are the topics to be discussed and some background information: Development of the Twin Lake land off of Twin Lake Boulevard: The City owns a 4.63 acre parcel on the north side of Twin Lake Boulevard (See Attachment #1). Back in 2007, the City held a neighborhood meeting to talk about development of the parcel (See Attachment #2). Based on that information and today’s conditions, a single-family development seems most likely. Back in 2007, we were looking at doing an RFP for a developer, but the housing market was already slumping and then it crashed in 2008. The Council at that time felt we should sit on the land until the economy improved. That time may be now. The first question to answer is do we want to consider the sale/development of that parcel? If so, then I would recommend we commission an appraisal of the site for our desired type of development to get an accurate read of its value. Once we know the type of development we want and its value, we could conduct an RFP from qualified developers to see what we can generate. Your direction is needed as to how you want to proceed. Owasso/Woodlyn Redevelopment: Attachment #3 shows this redevelopment area. The City owns two parcels (167 & 53). To make this a viable redevelopment area, we need to acquire a new access point off of South Owasso (ideally 31 & 49). This would give us the ability to serve the area with utilities and a street while also providing visibility for a new building and better access to the two cell towers located on the east property line. I have had discussion with some parties about this parcel, but I believe to make it a viable site, we need to have control of the entire site we propose for redevelopment. (Note: the map of the area also includes McGough’s property and the rear portion of R & S. The availability of McGough is questionable. Without that parcel, the R & S piece has no value to our project. Another factor to consider is the McGough parcel is at a much lower elevation than 167 S. Owasso so that creates some challenges in terms of combining parcels.) We should discuss how you would like to proceed on this matter. I can also provide you with some financial background at Wednesday’s meeting relating to the cell towers.