Minutes - Public Works Committee - 01/19/2021

Home

Deputy City Administrator Gladhill stated that MnDOT is not going to allow two access points that close together and if that cul-de-sac is not provided, the $1,250,000 grant will not be provided from MnDOT. Councilmember Musgrove asked if the road could be stubbed rather than a cul-de-sac. City Engineer Westby commented that a shared driveway or something of that nature could be considered but that comes with other issues. Deputy City Administrator Gladhill stated that a second connection to Bowers Drive was already foregone and therefore he would find it hard to believe that public works and public safety would agree to less than a cul-de-sac. Councilmember Woestehoff asked the density for the County parcel. Deputy City Administrator Gladhill stated that currently the parcel is zoned R-2, medium density residential. He stated that part of this exercise would be to determine the highest and best use of the parcel adjacent to the solar farm. Chairperson Riley stated that it appears that everyone agrees to the one third split for the framework as presented and reviewed some of the other assumptions. He stated that it appears the consensus is to continue to look for outside funds for tree preservation purchase. He stated that underwriting is often done for the EDA but was unsure if that was typically done for public works. Deputy City Administrator Gladhill confirmed that it would be at the discretion of the City as to whether to require that underwriting. He stated that the underwriting does not have to be done and was provided as a tool. Chairperson Riley stated that two uses of funds were identified that could remove the underwriting recommendation. Mr. Bakritges stated that the mention of underwriting is new. He stated that the dollars for the approved framework and this framework are essentially the same and therefore he does not see a need for underwriting. He stated that the County parcel was not part of the framework before and now it is, and they agree that if funds are received the City can use them in that way. He stated that they do not see any additional enrichment of dollars to the developer which would justify underwriting. Mr. Bona stated that Capstone would never open their books for private development. He stated that the seven acres of tree preservation is something the City asked them to do. He stated that Riverdale is a collector road and traditionally both the City and developers contribute. He stated that they are not asking for public assistance that would justify underwriting. Chairperson Riley stated that underwriting is typically done for the EDA and it would essentially be the same idea but recognized that it is not typically done. Public Works Committee / January 19, 2021 Page 6 of 14