02-25-19-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—FEBRUARY 25, 2019 5 getting what they wanted from the City, the County has demanded mediation, which was not a transparent process. He stated the City had gone through a transparent process in creating the TCAAP Redevelopment Code, in discussing the City's goals and by participating in the JDA. At the end of the day, he believed the County just wanted more. He was unsure how the County could mediate for more. Therefore, he would not support the City entering into mediation with the County when he personally did not know what the differences were between the City and the County. He was of the opinion staff and the City Attorney drafted a very nice letter to the County what the City's position was. He stated he supported this letter. Mayor Grant commented on the original agreement that was between the City and the County noting the City was to complete the planning, zoning and utility work, while the County would remediate the property and sell it to a developer. He explained it appears the County has now become the developer. He reported the City has met all of the requested timelines, agrees to build a water tower, agrees to put in the trunk utilities, has completed an AUAR, and has completed a redevelopment code. He noted the County reviewed and approved the redevelopment code. Mayor Grant indicated the County has held discussions with the developer without the City being included. As it turns out, the City had not heard from the County until March of 2018 that a framework with the developer had been reached. He noted the City was not aware of this framework but was notified by the press. He reported the framework was based upon 1,460 units and the associated zoning. He commented as of September 4, 2018 the County brought forward a document that supported 1,460 units. He noted the County approved and supported 1,460 units on four separate occasions and has since walked away from negotiations. Mayor Grant stated the Council was previously at 1,280 units within the development and negotiated with the County up to 1,460 units. He noted the changes being requested by the County would require changes to the Redevelopment Code which would spin the clock back to December of 2016. He commented the economy was good, the agreements were in place and he believed the development should move forward as is. He expressed frustration that the County would not provide the City with specifics that were being asked for within the proposed mediation. He questioned how the City was to understand an impasse has been reached when no specifics were being offered. Mayor Grant stated at the February 4 JDA meeting the developer stated they have had no conversations with the County. He indicated the County was no longer talking to the developer or the City. He indicated Commissioner Huffman stated at this meeting that the County was negotiating in good faith. He did not believe this was happening when the County was no longer talking to anyone. He encouraged the County to come back to the table and take into consideration the implications of their actions. He commented on all of the agreements that were already in place for this development. He stated he did not want Rice Creek Commons to be a slippery slope where everything changes on a month to month basis. Rather, he wanted this agreement to have solid footing place so that it could move forward. Mayor Grant indicated he was unsure what the County was proposing but noted both the City and County wanted this project to be sustainable. He noted the property only had two access points and reported the site could only support so much density. He believed that the plan in place would enable some sustainability. He feared that changing the density would put the plan at risk.