05-22-2017 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL WORK SESSION May 1, 2017 DRAFT 5 - His recommendations: pursue collection of funds based on improper procedure; 179 restructure based on lack of usability of land dedicated; follow through on park 180 plans to grade area and provide work to make the land suitable for development of 181 park (Director Grochala explained the work that’s been done to a portion of the 182 land to date); 183 - Discussion of the number of acres dedicated (Director Grochala suggested that 184 any upland is considered usable); 185 - Original maps shown; 186 - Recommendation to verify status of 4.7 acres dedicated; evaluate if the remaining 187 dedicated park land acreage is open and usable to public; 188 - Developer trails that were put in; a master plan was called for by the city; 189 190 Mr. Sibell explained that the property owners were told that they would get more. 191 192 Community Development Director Grochala suggested that the presentation is really 193 bits and pieces of information from a 13 year period and a conclusion is attempted 194 based just on that. He cannot fully reconstruct the entire scenario considering the 195 many discussions and decisions along the way. There was a determination along the 196 way that the developer fulfilled his obligations. 197 198 Mayor Reinert suggested that the city attorney should review Mr. Sibell’s presentation 199 and any information that is pertinent. The city could find that there is some 200 responsibility but the council must have a discussion with the complete information. 201 He has heard of developments falling short of expectations. Staff should obtain a 202 legal opinion on the presentation, implications, council discussion and a 203 recommendation on how to proceed. The city has been presented with a serious 204 question and it deserves a thorough review. 205 206 Council Member Rafferty asked that the developer’s appraisal information should be 207 available. 208 209 The mayor asked to be involved in the attorney’s review and staff suggested that the 210 attorney will have to review prior to an opinion. The mayor wants to make sure the 211 information is all that is available. 212 213 Council Member Kusterman suggested that there should be a dual track of the council 214 considering how to provide some relief moving alongside the legal review. 215 216 Council Member Manthey asked if there was an original design for a park that changed 217 with the change in funding and Director Grochala remarked that there wasn’t a plan 218 that he was aware of. 219 220 The mayor is hearing that, at a minimum, the request is to fix the existing trails and 221 also improve the park land. 222 223