Laserfiche WebLink
Member Johnson recognized that there would be a water feature in The COR and asked if there is <br /> a plan to have more wetlands or water features within that area. <br /> Economic Development Manager Sullivan replied that the areas marked in red are anticipated to <br /> be filled to create more buildable area within The COR. He stated that once they have the costs <br /> known, they would determine if that is a cost the City would want to bear. He stated that the City <br /> could then choose whether that cost is rolled into the land price or split between the City and future <br /> development. He stated that staff believes that there will be an economy of scale in using the dirt <br /> from the excavation of the waterfront area to fill the desired areas. <br /> Member Riley commented that this would seem to be follow up to the decision the EDA made in <br /> February. He stated that the work has not been able to be done in-house and therefore this action <br /> would contract that work out. <br /> Economic Development Manager Sullivan confirmed that to be true and noted that the intention <br /> was to keep the EDA informed in the process. He recognized that there may be more cost than <br /> originally anticipated due to wetland replacement and that will be flushed out through this study. <br /> Member Riley stated that his other question was whether this would be the right time to complete <br /> this work but acknowledged that the TIF funds are available now and the work would need to be <br /> done prior to November of 2023 if that funding is going to be used. <br /> Motion by Member Stewart, seconded by Member MacLennan, to recommend to City Council to <br /> authorize the Wetland and COR Infrastructure proposals utilizing TIF District(2, 14)funds. <br /> Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Olson, Members Stewart, MacLennan, Howell, <br /> Johnson, and Riley. Voting No: None. Absent: Member Wiyninger. <br /> 4.02: Consider Cancellation of Purchase Agreement for Parcel 50; Case of Java <br /> Companies, LLC <br /> Economic Development Manager Sullivan presented the staff report. <br /> Member Howell asked if the City would need to have to setup a purchase agreement in the same <br /> way if this developer were to come back, or whether the notice to proceed language could be <br /> removed so that if the developer did not move forward again the City would not lose out on the <br /> earnest money after holding land for a significant amount of time. <br /> Economic Development Manager Sullivan replied that every purchase agreement can be <br /> negotiated with terms the EDA and Council agree to. He stated that those agreements are setup in <br /> that way to allow the due diligence, tenant and site plan approval work. He commented that in <br /> this case the developer is aware of who the tenants would be and therefore could be an ask if they <br /> were to come back for a future purchase agreement. He noted that the one thing that would be <br /> problematic is that typically the development review process occurs during that six months as well. <br /> He noted that the money is therefore allowed to be refundable during that time in the case that <br /> perhaps the City does not approve the development plans. He noted that time period could be <br /> Economic Development Authority/October 13, 2022 <br /> Page 3 of 5 <br />