Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Economic Development Manager Sullivan replied at this point Power Lodge is content to stay <br />where they are. He stated he knew Power Lodge has larger aspirations on wanting to upgrade their <br />facility and potentially relocate to another location within Ramsey. He stated the problem with <br />that location is, in looking at the footprint of what EZ Auto is now, there isn’t that large of a <br />footprint to have all of those autos in that area. <br /> <br />Councilmember Heineman asked if EZ Auto going to have a choice to continue there with the <br />amount of cars seen on the map if the frontage road was extended and take up the two RALF lots. <br />He asked if there has been discussion about that. <br /> <br />Councilmember Specht referenced Councilmember Riley’s comments about hearing EZ Auto <br />doesn’t want to stay. <br /> <br />Councilmember Riley replied correct. <br /> <br />Councilmember Specht commented hearing that the desire is to sell or relocate it would mean the <br />City would have an empty building. <br /> <br />Economic Development Manager Sullivan replied to Councilmember Heineman’s question <br />explaining the because of the process they are in now, they are not allowed to engage in those <br />discussions and have been asked by the County not to do so because the County is currently <br />engaged in negotiations. <br /> <br />Mr. Orcutt stated it is a part of the Uniform Relocation Act. He explained if two people owned a <br />business and were willing to make a trade that is how it works outside of a federal project. But in <br />a project like this the County has to pay the business owner so they do a market value and do all <br />that process, then they have to pay them. Then if the City wanted to work with the EDA. But it <br />isn’t allowed to move a business for the City benefit. He stated one thing to consider is those are <br />rental lots and if the City decides not to rent them anymore, that is their business. He stated he <br />thought there is still an opportunity to use them but will move forward with the direction given. <br /> <br />Mayor Kuzma commented his thoughts were to stay with the original, he would like to keep that <br />open for future visions even though it is unknown. He stated if the road is extended it locks the <br />City in to what is going on versus having a clean slate. He asked for consensus from Council. <br /> <br />Councilmember Specht commented he could see the benefit of the second emergency accesses <br />because it is one of the longest frontage roads. He didn’t think in the future it would be easy to <br />add, but it is a special project right now. <br /> <br />Mr. Orcutt commented the decision is if Council will extend it based on the City’s requirements. <br />He thought that is the way to approach this. It is not about the future but more of question of will <br />the City allow a cul-du-sac this long. He stated that is the best way to make a decision on this. He <br />stated that allows them to look at if it is the best interest of the City to have a cul-du-sac this long <br />is the question they should be looking at. <br /> <br />City Council Work Session /July 26, 2022 <br />Page 9 of 19 <br /> <br />