Laserfiche WebLink
is over and above what would normally be done but they do see a benefit for it because they need <br /> the utilities to get to the property. <br /> Mr. Bona stated on Puma, the 60/40 split there with the business park being on the east side and <br /> the residential being on the west side, they feel it is fair for the City to look at the same approach <br /> that was taken the first time. He stated this is needed for the business park and this has been <br /> done in the past and they would like to see that continue here as well. Moving forward, north of <br /> this phase, that is different because there will not be a business park involved anymore and 50/50 <br /> split is what they anticipate with that phase once they get there. <br /> Member Brunt left the meeting at 9:00 a.m. <br /> Chairperson Steffen asked what their preferred timing is for closing. <br /> Mr. Bona stated they would like to get this going as soon as possible but realistically they are <br /> probably looking at a fall completion for streets. They need to have this site under construction <br /> in July/August to have that happen. He stated the public project with Puma and Bunker Lake <br /> Boulevard will have to go through the 429 process which takes time. <br /> Member Hardin asked on the fifty-five acres if it was shovel ready. <br /> Economic Dev. Mgr/Assistant City Administrator Brama stated the shovel ready process they <br /> engaged WSB for was the entire south side of Bunker Lake Boulevard. <br /> Member Hardin asked if the City has put a number to the two-business park parcel. If the City <br /> completed this project based on Alternative B, what would the cost per square foot be for the <br /> infrastructure on those business park parcels. <br /> Economic Dev. Mgr/Assistant City Administrator Brama stated the study breaks the cost down <br /> per acre but it can be broken down per square foot. He stated he could find that out and let them <br /> know. He thought they would be looking at twenty-thirty thousand dollars per acre. <br /> Chairperson Steffen thought the EDA was in concurrence that they would not be in favor of <br /> Alternative C. <br /> Member Hardin stated he was not opposed to the residential project but was concerned with <br /> leapfrogging and how long it is going to take to develop the business parks. He stated he had <br /> reservations on this. He stated if they do move forward he would like to see the timeline for the <br /> assessments moved up. <br /> Member Williams left the meeting at 9:10 a.m. <br /> Chairperson Steffen thought Alternative A was Capstone Homes only offer for this. <br /> Member Riley stated if the EDA approved what Capstone Homes was asking for he wondered if <br /> they would be ready to close and move forward. <br /> Economic Development Authority/March 9,2017 <br /> Page 8 of 11 <br />