Laserfiche WebLink
that would allow for extending the cul-du-sac to provide access for the last business on that street. <br />He stated they are obligated by statute to look for opportunities to avoid buying properties. He <br />stated in this case there is an opportunity. With the number of renters that would have to be <br />relocated if the City were to acquire this property there is a substantially high cost to the tax payers. <br />He stated it would also allow for City owned properties to potentially be put back on the tax rolls <br />for the City and they could control what is done there. He stated the extension costs roughly <br />$250,000. He highlighted benefits including a cost savings of potentially several million, allowing <br />the property owner to stay, they would utilize their property instead of the two rental lots and that <br />would accommodate the business. He added this also allows for a potential crossing in the future. <br /> <br />Councilmember Specht asked if it was correct that there isn’t a way to have it connect all the way <br />to Armstrong Boulevard. <br /> <br />Mr. Orcutt replied that is correct at this time. He stated in the future if the property owner decided <br />to move or sell, or if a one-way was run in front of them to connect with the ramp but it is a timing <br />issue. They didn’t want to jeopardize funds that they have to deliver the project. He stated this <br />allows for an opportunity to either go under with the extension and do some of those other <br />components. <br /> <br />Councilmember Woestehoff referenced the two rental properties and asked if they are rented to <br />the owner of EZ Auto. <br /> <br />Economic Development Manager Sullivan confirmed this. He stated the City has a lease with <br />them stating in effect that as soon as the Highway 10 project happens they can terminate the lease <br />with no cause giving a year to vacate those properties. <br /> <br />Councilmember Woestehoff asked if they could move the cul-du-sac to the empty third property <br />and sell the two properties to EZ Auto if they were interested. <br /> <br />Economic Development Manager Sullivan replied there haven’t been any discussions about the <br />sale of any of the RALF properties because they have been told until the official mapping is in <br />place they can’t be put on the market. He speculated the owner may be interested. <br /> <br />Councilmember Specht commented that is a good point because it would be one big lot there. <br /> <br />Councilmember Riley referenced an email received from City Administrator Hagen in the <br />afternoon providing information about those parcels and why they may not be great for <br />development including water and sewer concerns. He asked for a further explanation. <br /> <br />City Administrator Hagen replied at the Staff level they discussed the type of future development <br />that is likely and if it is development the City desires. He stated there isn’t water and sewer down <br />the frontage road now but in the event that it is needed due to failing septic systems in the future <br />that couldn’t be replaced, they start to look at putting infrastructure in the ground for half the <br />benefit. If there were development on both sides of the road it would make more sense. In this <br />case there are only three or four parcels depending on how the larger RALF property develops. <br />He stated the future on-going maintenance cost is a recurring concern for Staff along with annual <br />City Council Work Session /July 26, 2022 <br />Page 2 of 19 <br /> <br />