Agenda - Public Works Committee - 02/18/2020

Home

From:Tim Gladhill To: Cc:Chloe McGuire Brigl; Bruce Westby; Kurt Ulrich; Diana Lund; Kent Roessler; David Allen Subject:RE: Puma Street Assessment Date:Thursday, February 13, 2020 10:54:00 AM Attachments:image001.png image002.png image006.png Assessment Amounts.pdf image008.png Jay: Thank you for your feedback as we work towards an ultimate solution that is equitable to all parties. Your feedback is helpful as we get into the more granular detail based on high-level policy direction. Attached you will find a proposal that we think is fair to all involved. We have taken your feedback and revised the proposal in an attempt to find a reasonable solution. The assessment amounts are based on net developable acreage to be able to provide appropriate scale based on project size as opposed for per foot frontage. This has not been approved by the City. The intent of this email is to garner your feedback prior to policy and implementation discussions with the City Council. Some High-Level Clarifying Points The Assessed Amount does NOT include Trunk Water and Trunk Sanitary Sewer – those will be paid by the City from Trunk Fees City Staff is proposing a contribution to the project as the municipality in the amount of $225,000 to acknowledge the role of Puma Street as a Collector Road serving multiple neighborhoods and districts City Staff is proposing that the City would incur the assessment amount for Outlot C, Alpha Development as Property Owner to your concern raised in Paragraph 3 of your email response In this scenario, your assessed amount would be less than the other two parties (City and Capstone) City Staff also would like to clarify a couple of policy points based on your response below. I want to clarify that my comments below are intended to be helpful and find a solution to move forward, as I acknowledge that responses via email can come across with a negative tone. On Paragraph 2, you note that the parcel is not within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). This is not correct. The site is within the MUSA. The site is guided as Low Density Residential in the Comprehensive Plan and located in the R-1 Residential (MUSA) District. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment on the table is to introduce Medium Density Residential in the Comprehensive Plan and R-2 Medium Density Residential (Detached) to the Zoning Map/Code. Any development scenario will create capacity needs on Alpine Drive and Puma Street. On Paragraph 4, you note that your property will not will not gain direct benefit and that your future project will not gain direct access to Puma Street. Staff desires to go on record to note that it is our direction and interpretation that we will only allow one access onto Alpine Drive and a secondary access must be constructed on Puma Street. Setting that argument aside, there is still capacity needs on Puma Street and benefit to your property from this project. Additionally, as noted above, we agree with your argument that this road serves more than just the two adjacent residential development properties and serves a much broader area, including a Business Park. It is with that in mind that City Staff is recommending an additional contribution of $225,000 in addition to taking on the assessment amount for Outlot C, Alpha Development. At the end of the day, our goal is for a fair and equitable distribution of costs. We agree that the City has an elevated role, but we also feel that development should contribute to the additional capacity needs. Additional capacity needs as a result of new development should not be borne by the general taxpayer alone. Our baseline traffic analysis demonstrates a clear need for safety and capacity improvements, largely driven by new development. These baseline traffic studies do not even include your requested land use changes, which is only going to exacerbate the issue. We look forward to being partners in the solution to Puma Street so we can keep your future land use goals and Land Use Applications moving forward. Sincerely, Tim