My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-31-05
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
01-31-05
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2012 10:46:45 AM
Creation date
11/14/2006 4:22:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
59
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 />Guard had already indicated they were not interested in a land swap. Mr. Clark <br />responded that the Army actually owns the land, and without the swap the primer tracer <br />area of the property is essentially land locked without access. Ms. Wolfe noted that the <br />discussion with ArmylNational Guard needs to be broader than strictly the land swap, but <br />rather a discussion regarding access and how to potentially alter borders so that access <br />works and the primer tracer area becomes viable. <br /> <br />Councilmember Rem left the meeting at 9:15 p.m. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden voiced a concern regarding how attorney's time will be tracked. <br />How would we determine, for example, whether Mr. Comadeca's time is for the Ctiy or <br />for the developer, and whether it is reimbursable under certain terms of the development <br />agreement? Mr. Clark answered that expenses and the nature ofthe work would be <br />carefully tracked and monitored as it is now. Ms. Wolfe noted that perhaps as the <br />transition is made to a new agreement that specific language should be made clearer, <br /> <br />There was discussion about site characterization. Councilmember Holden indicated that <br />she thought site characterization was the developer's responsibility from the beginning. <br />Both Ms. Wolfe and Mr. Clark indicated that they did not believe this was the case per <br />the first Interim Development Agreement. Councilmember Grant stated that he believed <br />it was something they were going to cover all along, but suggested that staff review the <br />agreement and respond back to Council at a later date. <br /> <br />David McClung, a resident in the audience, asked if the one-year effectiveness ofthe <br />appraisal was a statutory requirement or something covered in federal regulations. He <br />suggested that if it was the latter it might be negotiable. Mr. Clark indicated that he <br />would have to research that question. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant requested that the calendar/task list be incorporated into a flow <br />chart. It would be helpful, he stated, to see what things must precede others. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark stated that in order to proceed with this project, and the required additional <br />investment, there is a need to have a firmer commitment from the City to CRR, especially <br />regarding financial or public assistance. Mr. Grant responded that it would be easier to <br />discuss ifthere was some indication of a dollar range. Mr. Clark stated that he hopes to <br />have a range to discuss in approximately three weeks. The city's financial consultant is <br />working on some scenarios based on the current draft framework plan and other <br />assumptions. This will change as more is learned and decided about the project. <br />Councilmember Grant requested that staff and the development team keep the Council <br />"out in front" and not behind as this project and related discussions progress. <br /> <br />Ms. Wolfe asked ifthere is a commitment by the City Council to try to attain the June <br />deadline. There was further discussion to clarify the various items on the calendar/task <br />list. <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.