Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Norman stated that tomorrow morning we are going to work on six minor issues. Section <br />7.9 regarding the mad improvements - we are asking to agree on some numbers - they want 90 <br />days - we are sayi~, g 180 days. <br /> <br />Councilmember Zi. mmerman asked about Section 7.8a - did they take out Variolite Street? <br /> <br />Assistant Director of Public Works Olson stated that they crossed it off but refer to it in the <br />definitions of J and 4 - it is just moved to a different section in the agreement. <br /> <br />Mr. Norman continued with Section 9.7 - parking ramp - how long do we hold escrows if they <br />do not build. We need to plug a number in there. Section 11.1 Landscaping - "... subject to <br />'seasonality' . . ." i Our attorney isn't sure seasonality is a word - he will try to fit a better word <br />in there. Section 12.3 - the portion where they are paying cash - the attorneys are working out <br />when we get paid. 12.4 - toward the end of the section - we are pushing for something called <br />"evergreening". Mr. Olson explained what the term "evergreening" means - the letter of credit <br />can only be released by the City. Mr. Norman continued with Article 5 - it used to say the City <br />Hall site - now it reads conveyances. Section 5.1 reads City Hall site and 5.3 - added this <br />afternoon - deals with well house land. <br /> <br />Mr. Olson stated that it said City Hall site and park outlots should be removed from the <br />assessments and cash for the 90 foot strip of land. Park - 4.11 - we have seen a lot of pretty <br />pictures as it relates to parks. When you start looking at improvements on the original exhibit - <br />they had only one ~improvement we felt was creditworthy and that was a trail. When we started <br />to add up what these improvements would amount to, cost wise, it came to about $10 to $12 <br />million dollars and it will not generate even half of that. Where will the money come from? <br /> <br />Discussion ensued regarding park development. Councilmember Elvig stated we have tried to <br />plan this. It boils down to money - how will we get this paid for. Functions at the park were <br />discussed - athletic - and what would be provided - striping, etc. Director of Public Works <br />Kapler suggested that if the school uses the park for athletics, maybe the school would do the <br />striping. <br /> <br />Councihnember Zimmerman inquired about collecting park fees from, for example, a 170-unit <br />townhome development. <br /> <br />Mr. Olson stated that they have satisfied about 60 percent of park dedication fees with land <br />dedication. <br /> <br />Councilmember Cook cautioned that if you give them credit for improvements to the park, you <br />will not be able to .give credit to the secondary development. <br /> <br />Mr. Olson stated that we will waive the fees if they give above and beyond. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig commented that it is more efficient for the developer to put the parks in. <br /> <br />City Council Work Session/September 15, 2003 <br /> Page 9 of 10 <br /> <br /> <br />