Laserfiche WebLink
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION March 7, 2011 <br /> APPROVED <br /> 89 would also like to look at the general benefit derived and use a pool of funds that is <br /> ' -- 90 collected district wide (taxing authority). <br /> 91 <br /> 92 When the mayor asked how often these improvements occur, Attorney Kolb explained <br /> 93 that this is considered a one-time cost; past completion of this project only regular <br /> 94 maintenance is expected. Mr. Kolb added that the financing of the project that they <br /> 95 propose is more economical (saving approximately $200,000) and they plan to solicit <br /> 96 public input on the plans. <br /> 97 <br /> 98 The council will consider the resolution consenting to the proposal at the March 14, 2011 <br /> 99 council meeting. <br /> 100 <br /> 101 3. 49/J Development Proposal—Economic Development Coordinator Divine <br /> 102 introduced Oppidan development representatives Joe Boone, Paul Tuski and Patrick <br /> 103 Barrett as well as Attorney Peter Coyle, all present to discuss a grocery development <br /> 104 proposal for County Road 49 and J. Ms. Divine explained that there are issues that make <br /> 105 the area in question challenging for development and the development team is present to <br /> 106 discuss them with the council and seek some direction on the council's interest. <br /> 107 <br /> 108 Attorney Coyle explained that there are questions on infrastructure (roads, water, sewer) <br /> 109 as well as gaining control of all the necessary properties. <br /> 110 <br /> 111 Mr. Tuski distributed and then reviewed development plans for the site. A grocery <br /> 112 operation is the catalyst for this proposed development and, based on research, they are <br /> 113 comfortable the market is there. The cost of necessary infrastructure is one item that <br /> 114 they'd like to discuss with the council. <br /> 115 <br /> 116 The mayor recalled that there have been issues raised regarding development of this site <br /> 117 in the past, mainly relating to neighborhood intrusion (24 hour operation, lighting and <br /> 118 noise). <br /> 119 <br /> 120 A member of the development team replied that they have dealt with similar concerns in <br /> 121 the past. He is comfortable that they can deal with those concerns and he provided the <br /> 122 council with a picture of a grocery site in St. Paul that indicated how they dealt with <br /> 123 keeping lighting from intruding on a neighborhood. They are aware of concerns and <br /> 124 ready to address them. <br /> 125 <br /> 126 Attorney Coyle remarked that the team is interested in knowing if the proposed <br /> 127 development is a basic possibility. They are estimating a cost of about $1.5 million to <br /> 128 extend utilities to the area. Those utilities would obviously provide benefit to other <br /> 129 properties and so they wonder if the city would be interested in assisting through the use <br /> 130 of tax increment. He reminded the council that the state is allowing the use of tax <br /> 131 increment for retail but that allowance has an end date that is approaching. For the <br /> 132 developer to handle the cost alone would be an impediment to development. <br /> 133 <br /> 3 <br />