My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 02-13-1995
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
CCP 02-13-1995
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:10:13 PM
Creation date
11/6/2006 4:15:49 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
65
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> I iJOM 1W~ <br /> I. CITY OF ARDEN fiLLS 1&4 e <br /> MEMORANDUM ~ <br /> I DATE: February 10, 1995 ~ <br /> . TO: Mayor and City Council (\~ <br /> Brian Fritsinger, City Administrat~ <br /> I FROM: <br /> SUBJECT: Arden Hills Gateway Business District <br /> I The purpose of this memorandum is to set forth the staff recommendations concerning the latest <br /> I expression of the terms and conditions under which Everest Development has stated that it is <br /> willing to proceed to develop the proposed business park project. The following addresses, in <br /> the order set forth in Everest's January 30, 1995 letter, the points raised in the letter: <br /> I 1. The first item in the January 30th letter is merely a statement of the build-out assumptions <br /> used by Everest in its proposal. Neither staff nor Everest believe that this schedule will <br /> I be the schedule on which the buildings will actually be built. <br /> 2. Staff supports 1he use of tax-exempt bonds to fund the public improvements if the bonds <br /> .- can be sold tax-exempt, and still allow the City to obtain sufficient security to ensure that <br /> the debt service on the bonds will be generated. Staff discussions to date with bond <br /> attorneys indicate that bonds guaranteed by Everest may have to be sold as taxable bonds. <br /> I However, we are still exploring ways in which the bonds might be structured to allow <br /> them to be tax exempt. Related to this item, staff has recently become aware that, <br /> depending on the final site configuration of Everest's development, it may be necessary to <br /> I relocate a main sewer line running through the property. If necessary, the cost of such a <br /> relocation could be between $750,000 and $1,000,000. Any agreement be1ween the City <br /> I and Everest needs to anticipate this possibility. <br /> , Staff supports the concept expressed in item 3 that Everest will be responsible for <br /> ~. <br /> I assembling the site but that the City will use its powers of eminent domain if necessary. <br /> This assumes that we can reach agreement on a process by which the City, in its <br /> condemnation of parcels, will not be financially at risk. Also, Everest expressed its <br /> I desire to be able to stop a condemnation if the cost of the land is determined to be <br /> excessive. Given that desire, a number of difficult timing issues arise that must be <br /> handled in a development agreement. <br /> I 4. Item 4 discussed the proposed allocation of tax increment. As the Council is aware, one <br /> of staffs main concerns wilh the proposal is the absence of any cap on the amount of tax <br /> I increment that may be recovered by Everest. Everest's desire is to be able to hit a "home <br /> run" if it is more successful in developing the project than anticipated. Our response to <br /> I- that is that it should be possible to define what is meant by a "home run". That definition <br /> I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.