Agenda - Council - 02/24/2020 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Chair Bauer stated that Puma Street might be utilized by more than just the residents, with the industrial park in that area. He stated that the employees and possibly trucks accessing the industrial park will increase traffic on Puma Street and therefore believed the City should contribute to the project. Councilmember Kuzma asked if this is an MSA street. Deputy City Administrator Gladhill stated that this roadway is included in the MSA system, and would be eligible for MSA funds, but the City would need to decide if this is the correct project to use MSA funds on, as there is a large demand on the limited MSA funding. He noted that the Public Works Committee will continue that discussion. Councilmember Specht agreed that the City should financially contribute towards the project. Councilmember Musgrove asked for background information on the temporary construction of Puma Street. Deputy City Administrator Gladhill provided background information on the creation of Puma Street. Councilmember Heinrich asked if there have been similar projects in years past. Deputy City Administrator Gladhill replied that there have been a variety of similar projects. He stated that some projects in The COR have been funded by the City at a rate of 60 percent that could be reimbursed through TIF. Councilmember Specht asked if the cost -share is lesser in this case because these are residential developments rather than commercial. Deputy City Administrator Gladhill stated that looking holistically at the City's transportation needs; this is not the same setup as the Bunker Lake industrial park scenario. He noted that the Bunker Lake industrial park scenario was more linked through economically development and the City funded its portion through the County HRA funds. Councilmember Specht asked for details on the position of Paxmar in its email. Deputy City Administrator Gladhill stated that Paxmar stated that he is unsure of the exact amount Paxmar feels would be fair but believes that one third is too much for their development to be assessed. He noted that the Paxmar parcel is still awaiting rezoning to support its proposed development. Mayor LeTourneau asked if the City is still the owner of the parcel east of Puma Street. Deputy City Administrator Gladhill stated that the City largely owns the four -acre parcel where the road alignment would occur. City Council Work Session / February 11, 2020 Page 3 of 10