Minutes - Council Work Session - 05/18/2021 - Special

Home

Councilmember Heineman commented that the City does this well but does not market it well enough and suggested replacing the word “enhance” with “spotlight”. The Council agreed with that language change. Deputy City Administrator Gladhill stated that staff would recommend adding an action item related to solar, electric charging stations and other opportunities. Councilmember Howell commented that the Environmental Policy Board places electronic charging stations as a high priority on its Work Plan. Councilmember Musgrove stated that she would prefer private industry making those improvements rather than the City. Deputy City Administrator Gladhill confirmed that there is not consensus from the Council to add that action item. He confirmed the consensus of the Council to keep the water treatment plant in the plan and to remove the public works facility from the plan. He stated that Andover set aside dollars for the sole purpose of locally funding open space preservation and asked if there would be an appetite from the Council to look into that type of opportunity. Councilmember Musgrove asked what is meant by that and if there are any areas that the City would have in mind. Deputy City Administrator Gladhill stated that Andover went out to its residents with an advisory ballot question to determine if they supported levying public dollars to set aside to acquire and preserve open space property to protect it from development. Councilmember Specht asked if those dollars could have been used for the tree area within Riverstone South. Deputy City Administrator Gladhill confirmed that the funds could be used for that type of purpose. Councilmember Musgrove commented that while she thinks it could be a good idea, it would be difficult to ask for taxpayer dollars to secure land that they may not ever visit and could eventually be sold for another purpose. City Administrator Ulrich clarified that if land is purchased in this manner, it could not be sold for a future purpose and would be dedicated similarly to park land. He stated that the property would not generate taxes but would also preserve areas from development. Councilmember Woestehoff commented that he would support that concept as the land could not be sold for another use in the future. He believed that most residents would support that type of use, as long as the intent is clearly communicated. He stated that there is a “park” on Variolite that he would consider a good concept of open space. He stated that perhaps this could provide funding to protect land sources of that nature that have a value outside of development. City Council Special Work Session / May 18, 2021 Page 12 of 19