HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-03-2025 JDA Agenda Packet
Joint Development Authority
TCAAP Redevelopment Project
Joint Development Authority
TCAAP Redevelopment Project
JDA MEETING AGENDA
Monday, November 3, 2025, 5:30 p.m. at Arden Hills City Hall
1. Roll Call
2. Approval of Agenda
3. Approval of Minutes
4. Public Input
5. Consent Agenda
6. Old Business
7. Public Hearings
8. New Business
a. Receive Building 116 Presentation
b. Approve 2026 Budget
c. Review Road Map
9. Administrative Director’s Report
10. Development Director’s Report
11. Commissioner Updates
12. Adjournment
Joint Development Authority
TCAAP Redevelopment Project
Joint Development Authority
TCAAP Redevelopment Project
AGENDA ITEM 2
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 3, 2025
TO: Joint Development Authority Board of Commissioners
FROM: Directors Jagoe and Mitchell
SUBJECT: Approval of Agenda
The agenda for the November 3, 2025, JDA Meeting is presented for approval.
Action Requested:
Approve the agenda for November 3, 2025.
Joint Development Authority
TCAAP Redevelopment Project
Joint Development Authority
TCAAP Redevelopment Project
AGENDA ITEM 3
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 3, 2025
TO: Joint Development Authority Board of Commissioners
FROM: Directors Jagoe and Mitchell
SUBJECT: Approval of Minutes
The minutes for the previous JDA meetings and work sessions are presented for approval.
Attachments:
• June 25 Special JDA Meeting Minutes
• September 9 JDA Meeting Minutes
• October 6 JDA Work Session Minutes
Action Requested:
Approve the minutes from June 25, September 9, and October 6, 2025.
Special Joint Development Authority
Wednesday, June 25, 2025
Arden Hills City Council Chambers
Minutes
7:00 pm
Roll Call
Joint Development Authority: Chair Jon Wicklund, Commissioner Tara Jebens-Singh,
Commissioner Kurt Weber, Commissioner Mary Jo McGuire, Commissioner Tena Monson
Also present: Jessica Jagoe (Arden Hills); Ella Mitchell (Ramsey County), Rachel Tierney
(Kennedy & Graven)
Roll call taken.
Approval of Agenda
Motion by Commissioner McGuire seconded by Commissioner Weber to approve the agenda as
presented. Motion carried.
Approval of Minutes
Motion by Commissioner Monson seconded by Commissioner McGuire to approve the June 2,
2025 JDA meeting minutes as presented. Motion carried.
Public Input
Bob Lux, Alatus, encouraged the JDA to provide Alatus with a 74 day extension until September
7, 2025 which will allow him the time he needs to work through the final details of the
development agreement with the JDA Advisory Committee and attorneys. He reported he has
made great progress in the past month. He commented over the past five or six months he has
been working to secure a clear path for the entire project. He discussed the final plan that he
was proposing to move forward and was pleased to report he has brought Mario Cocchiarella
with Maplewood Development on board to assist with completing this project. He reported Mr.
Cocchiarella was one of the largest land developers in the metro area and he knows this
project.
Mario Cocchiarella, Owner of Maplewood Development Company and Belair Sitework Services,
introduced himself to the JDA and provided background information on the master plans he has
completed in the metro area. He noted the most recent project he completed was Amber Fields
near the University of Minnesota. He indicated he also completed the Willow Brook project in
Oakdale and Southwest Crossroads development in Maple Grove. He stated as the owner of
Belair Sitework he was a national earthwork and utility contractor with offices in Denver, Forth
Worth, Fort Myers and Minneapolis. He explained the work completed by Belair Sitework was
complimentary to this kind of project as it required large amounts of mass grading and utility
work.
Consent Agenda
None.
Old Business
None.
Public Hearings
None.
New Business
a. Consider Request for Preliminary Development Agreement Extension
Director Mitchell stated on December 4, 2023, the JDA and Alatus executed a Preliminary
Development Agreement (PDA) for the California Parcel at Rice Creek Commons. This PDA
outlines the parties’ agreement to attempt to negotiate the terms of a Final Development
Agreement by June 30, 2025. The agreement expires by its own terms after June 30, 2025,
unless extended by the parties. At the June 2, 2025, JDA meeting, Bob Lux from Alatus verbally
requested that the term of the Preliminary Development Agreement between Alatus and the
JDA be extended to 30 days past the date that the 90% plans for the Spine Road and related
infrastructure are expected. The target date for the 90% plans is August 8, 2025, so 30 days
beyond that would be September 7, 2025. She described how the PDA is connected to the
Purchase and Sale Agreement (PSA). Further information was provided regarding the proposed
development and cost to complete the mass grading. The financials provided by Ehlers and
Alatus were reviewed by staff. Staff commented further on the term sheet requirements and
explained the JDA could consider approval, approval as amended, or denial of the PDA
extension to September 7, 2025. It was noted, if the JDA takes no action, the PDA will expire on
June 30, 2025.
Chair Wicklund asked if the JDA Advisory Committee members had anything additional to add
at this time.
Commissioner Monson explained she had a soft recommendation to not extend the PDA to
September 7, 2025. She stated this was a really tough moment and a tough decision after
sitting in all of the meetings. She indicated after looking back at the last two years, she was of
the opinion there was not a great deal of engagement from the developer. She commented on
how this had changed in the last five or six weeks in order to get this project across the finish
line. She explained she and Chair Wicklund were serving on the JDA in 2024 when the County
was trying to work to complete a purchase agreement and this did not happen. She
commented she has liked the activity from the last five or six weeks, but she questioned if this
was enough and inquired why this activity had not been taken sooner. She indicated this also
had her asking what would be accomplished in the next 60 days. She was of the opinion more
progress would be made in 60 days, but a development agreement would be finalized. She
reported the reason she was making a soft recommendation for denial was because there was
a Commissioner that really wanted to see another 60 days of negotiations, she would be willing
to have that conversation. She stated she wanted everyone to be comfortable with how this
project moved forward, but noted she did not see value in a 60 day extension.
Commissioner Jebens-Singh commented she came onto the JDA in January. She explained she
had hoped this would spur negotiations by the developer and this did not occur, except for the
last few weeks. She stated this was unfortunate because there were a number of complex
issues that have yet to be addressed. She believed there was an outline in place, but the group
has not been able to put flesh on the bones. She was of the opinion an extension to September
7, 2025 would not get this development to the place it needs to be. She believed the extension
would just lead to another extension in September. For this reason, she was not recommending
the extension be approved.
Commissioner McGuire thanked staff and the JDA Advisory Committee members for all of their
efforts. She noted this was her first time serving on the JDA. She stated everyone wants to see
this development move forward but she too was concerned about he lack of movement from
the developer. She agreed that another 60 days may not be enough time to address all of the
outstanding issues for this project. She asked if an extension was already granted to the
developer.
Director Mitchell explained this PDA has not had any extensions. She noted the previous PDA
from 2016 received an extension.
Commissioner Weber expressed concern with what the purchase price would be for the land.
He stated Alatus had proposed the purchase price being $1, but then it appears this is
contingent on the cost for the mass grading.
Director Mitchell explained these differences were describing to the different deal structures
that had been proposed over the past year. She commented the current deal structure would
have the mass grading privately financed, the land conveyed in one transaction and the
purchase price would be $1.
Commissioner Weber asked what the holdup was on this proposal.
Director Mitchell indicated the holdups were time and a number of unknowns. She commented
every time a new structure was proposed, staff had to complete a great deal of due diligence in
addition to recalculating risk. She reported Attachment C was a good overview of what
information staff had gathered to date.
Commissioner Jebens-Singh commented further on how staff had just not had enough time to
complete the necessary due diligence or vetting on the current plan that was being proposed
because it was a flip from the previous plan.
Commissioner Monson added she did not believe the current proposal was bad, but it was very
complicated given the environmental liabilities. She commented on how much time it would
take to work through all of the complexities within the proposal, noting this was just on the
County side and there were still issues that would have to be worked through with the City.
She indicated the path forward was very long and 60 days would not get the project there.
Commissioner McGuire expressed her gratitude to the JDA Advisory Committee members for
all of their time and efforts in working with staff and Alatus to reach an agreement.
Commissioner Weber thanked the JDA Advisory Committee members for all of their time and
attention to this matter.
Commissioner Monson stated she was aware of the gravity and impact of the decision before
the JDA. She commented she wanted to see this project get done and she believed the
proposed recommendation would lead the JDA in this direction.
Commissioner McGuire commented the JDA was very committed to getting this development
completed and the JDA wanted to find a partner that can get this accomplished in the best way
possible.
Commissioner Weber stated he cared a lot about the future of this development and he
wanted to see it move forward. He explained he made a statement several months ago, the he
would support an extension. He commented on how the looming deadline lit a fire under the
developer. He was pleased by the work that had been accomplished in the last five or six
weeks, but he agreed 60 days was not enough time to complete the work that needs to be
done. He stated he was not happy to see this agreement coming to an end, but he did not see
an alternative at this time.
Commissioner Jebens-Singh commented she had hope that the continued momentum would
push this project forward. She indicated she came onto the JDA with an open mind, but
meeting after meeting, she was not getting the responses she needed from Alatus. She
explained the doing was not getting done on Alatus’ part. She believed it was her job to ask
what was best for this project and she could not in good faith move this project forward in a
timely manner with the current folks.
Chair Wicklund asked what would have to get done between now and September 7, 2025 that
would make the JDA supportive of an extension.
Commissioner Weber stated the JDA was supposed to have a development agreement on
August 7, 2024. He explained the development agreement was a year overdue and the
purchase agreement was no where near being completed. He was of the opinion the clock has
run out.
Commissioner McGuire commented she believed Commissioner Weber had stated this well.
Commissioner Jebens-Singh reported the collective development team that started at the
beginning has shifted over time and even with the newest proposal, additional partners are
being brought in and the JDA Advisory Committee does not have all of the details and vision
from these partners. She indicated this gives her pause because she was questioning who
would need to be around the table to negotiate the final terms.
Commissioner Monson stated the intent was to have a development agreement by June 30,
2025. She commented if a purchase and sale agreement could be reached in 60 days and the
complexities could be worked through after that time could be convincing enough to provide an
extension. She reported if an extension was to be considered she would need very clear
milestones in place.
Chair Wicklund explained he has history with this project as he was involved in 2017 and 2018.
He understood this was a very complicated project and he heard that the JDA was not confident
the current timeline could be achieved. He indicated he also heard the JDA was very supportive
of moving the project forward and the group appreciated the efforts that have been made in
the past five to six weeks. He stated the ramifications of not approving the extension were
significant. He commented this had him leaning in the same manner as Commissioner Monson
where an extension for a short amount of time with an objective was something he could
support. He indicated he could not support an extension for another year, but if there were
elements to move the project forward he could support this.
Commissioner Jebens-Singh asked what the specific requirements would be, if an extension
were to be considered.
Chair Wicklund stated he would recommend the specific requirements be determined by the
JDA Advisory Committee members.
Commissioner Jebens-Singh commented in her opinion activity does not necessarily mean
productivity. She indicated one of her frustrations with the progress was that the requests for
information were only being met with some of the information or hints to it is coming. She
believed that if the extension were granted, the JDA would just be buying another 60 days of
the same.
Commissioner McGuire stated she was feeling much the same. While she appreciated the fact
there has been activity, she did not believe all of the necessary actions could be taken in 60
days, which meant another extension would be required. She understood the JDA has come a
long way in determining what was wanted in this development and she believed it was time to
move on.
Commissioner Weber stated this decision weighed heavy on him because this development was
a big deal for the City of Arden Hills. He wanted to see progress and to see this development
moving forward. He commented that even if an extension were approved, an agreement could
not be reached in 60 days.
Commissioner Monson explained she would not be making a motion to approve the extension
and noted she appreciated the support she was receiving from the County Commissioners.
Commissioner Jebens-Singh stated she appreciated the deliberative partnership between the
City, the County and the community representative. In addition, she appreciated all of staff’s
thoughtful efforts throughout the negotiation process.
The JDA directed staff to inform Alatus that the PDA term would expire on June 30, 2025.
b. Review Road Map
Director Mitchell reviewed the Road Map with the JDA noting the JDA would meet next on
Monday, July 7, 2025.
Chair Wicklund recommended the July 7 meeting be a worksession meeting and he asked that
staff prepare an agenda that allows the JDA to respond to Item 8A. The JDA was in agreement
with this recommendation.
Administrative Director’s Report
Director Mitchell reported staff continues to have conversations with Xcel Energy regarding the
thermal energy network pilot. She explained she was in the process of finalizing the details for
the Department of Commerce Geothermal Planning grant that the County received. She was
hoping one test well could be able to be drilled with the grant funds to explore the geological
conditions and begin plans for a Town Center district energy system.
Development Director’s Report
Director Jagoe had no updates for the JDA.
Commissioner Updates
Commissioner McGuire thanked the JDA members and the City of Arden Hills for their strong
partnership with the County.
Commissioner Weber stated the City appreciates the strong partnership that has been achieved
with the County as well.
Commissioner Jebens-Singh thanked Alatus for all of their efforts and noted she was looking
forward to what came next.
Commissioner Monson explained she heard the Timberwolves sold and that they were looking
for a new stadium.
Adjournment
Meeting adjourned at 8:12 pm.
Approved _____________________________________ _______________________
Jon Wicklund, Chair Date
Joint Development Authority
Monday, September 9, 2025
Arden Hills City Council Chambers
Minutes
5:30 pm
Roll Call
Joint Development Authority: Chair Jon Wicklund, Commissioner Tara Jebens-Singh,
Commissioner Kurt Weber, Commissioner Mary Jo McGuire, Commissioner Tena Monson
Also present: Jessica Jagoe (Arden Hills); Ella Mitchell (Ramsey County), Rachel Tierney
(Kennedy & Graven)
Roll call taken.
Approval of Agenda
Motion by Commissioner Monson seconded by Commissioner Jebens-Singh to approve the
agenda as presented. Motion carried.
Approval of Minutes
Motion by Commissioner Jebens-Singh seconded by Commissioner Weber to approve the July
2, 2025 Closed JDA meeting minutes, July 7, JDA meeting minutes, July 21 Closed JDA meeting
minutes and August 4, JDA work session minutes. as presented. Motion carried.
Public Input
Steve Scott, 4286 Norma Avenue, addressed the JDA regarding the County’s mismanagement of
this project, especially over the past eight years. He indicated the early phases of TCAAP had
Ryan Companies working on a plan only to withdraw after a number of years noting tackling the
largest superfund site in the State was too risky for their investors. He explained an NFL
stadium was once proposed by several County Commissioners. Concerns soon rose about
where the residents of Arden Manor would live and one Commissioner stated they would have
to find somewhere else to live, which sparked an outcry from Arden Hills residents. He stated
affordable housing did not appear to be a priority for the County at that time. After the NFL
chose downtown the County purchased the TCAAP site from the federal government. He
reported a joint powers agreement was drafted and the JDA was formed. He indicated the JDA
was responsible for the cleanup and sale of the property, while the City was tasked with zoning
the parcel, producing a master development agreement and an AUAR. He noted all of these
deliverables were accomplished and delivered on time. He stated late in 2016 the County
members of the JDA presented an extensively redlined project vision vastly increasing the
proposed housing density, levels of affordability and demanding the City front a much larger
financial contribution. The County insisted the City sign off on this within four days, which
occurred over a holiday weekend. The City indicated they would have to take this matter back
to the taxpayers but offered the opportunity to negotiate the differences/sticking points. He
explained the County agreed to special worksession in early 2017 to hammer out the sticking
points but never showed up for the meeting. In fact, the County boycotted all subsequent JDA
meetings for the next four years and ultimately sued the City for being an unwilling partner
despite the City continuing to show up at all scheduled meetings. He reported the County
withdrew its funding and participation in the JDA and focused on other redevelopment projects
in the County, one being the Rivers Edge Project in St. Paul. He noted the Rivers Edge Project
was completed with zero affordable housing units in downtown St. Paul. Meanwhile, the
County sued the City of Arden Hills for being an unwilling partner and sought to have the
County nullify the joint powers agreement citing a hopeless impasse. He reported during court
ordered mediations, the City offered a higher level of density, which was rejected by the
County. After the court rejected the County’s claim that the City was the unwilling partner, the
court suggested the City and developer start direct negotiations and this was done. He stated a
new term sheet was produced where the developer greatly reduced the financial risk for Arden
Hills taxpayers. He indicated the County then rejected that agreement insisting that the City
accept higher housing density and affordable levels or else.
Chair Wicklund asked that Mr. Scott get to his conclusion.
Mr. Scott noted from 2016 to 2022 was considered a golden time to start construction because
interest rates were low, construction costs were low and the job market was strong. However,
the County squandered this opportunity for reasons that have not been explained. He asked at
what point do the taxpayers get an honest and transparent of the projects viability and costs.
He noted a current member of the JDA recently vowed to move the project forward but he
stated at the edge of a cliff moving forward may not be the most prudent action. He explained
Ryan Companies saw this many years ago and now the Arden Hills taxpayers are wondering
how much of their funding will be poured into this risky project.
Megan Howard, 1323 Watson Avenue in St. Paul, supported this development moving forward
because the Twin Cities desperately need more housing. She encouraged the JDA not let
perfect become the enemy of good. She recommended the proposed plan move forward in
order to provide more housing.
Paige Kahle, resident of St. Paul, explained she was with Yes in my Backyard. She questioned if
now was the time to talk about the development.
Chair Wicklund stated now would be the time to speak.
Ms. Kahle thanked Director Mitchell for reaching out to her today regarding this project. She
indicated she has been in communications with Bob Lux with Alatus as well as Maplewood
Development. She commented she has heard their side of the story and understood the JDA
decided to allow the agreement with Alatus to expire back in June. She explained after
watching the June JDA meeting, it appears there was frustration with Alatus and their lack of
response. She expressed frustration with the fact the JDA let this frustration get in the way of a
10 year partnership with Alatus. She stated Alatus had millions of dollars invested in this
project. She was of the opinion there were two members on the JDA that may have voted to
extend the agreement, but the majority was unhappy with Alatus. She encouraged the JDA not
to throw the baby out with the bath water. She reported this development was becoming a
national case study for what was wrong with getting housing on the ground. She indicated she
lived in St. Paul and she saw homeless people every day. She explained she had a lot of
emotions when it came to the JDA’s inability to get this much needed project off the ground
with the housing that was so desperately needed for the region. She stated Alatus has pledged
tens of millions of dollars of private financing to make this project happen and the JDA does not
want to see this project move forward. She indicated she was an environmentalist and she
understood sustainability guidelines were important, but she also knew it was important for
people to have housing. She questioned what the cost of the sustainability guidelines would be.
She reported one of the members of the JDA was the vice president of a solar panel company
and this was not a good look for the JDA. She stated Alatus would gladly come back to the table
and negotiate with the JDA, but in the meantime has filed a lawsuit against the JDA. She
understood the judge has stated Alatus has a case and that Ramsey County, the JDA and
taxpayers will have to pay millions of dollars to Alatus. She encouraged the JDA to renegotiate
with Alatus. She suggested the JDA members do what was right as public servants.
Lyle Salmela, 1480 Arden Vista Court, stated for his 30 years of involvement with the RAB, ERAB
and the JDA, he believed Rice Creek Commons was a tremendous opportunity for the growth of
Arden Hills and the metro area. He supported building the roads next year as this will set the
development on a path of major development occurring in 2030. He wished the JDA all the best
with its visions and goals.
Alex Polinsky, 16025 37th Avenue N in Plymouth, noted he was an employee of Alatus. He
understood there was a lawsuit between Alatus and the JDA team. He commented he was the
head of construction for Alatus and he does all of the fun finish details. He reported Alatus
wants to complete this development and would be willing to drop the lawsuit. He asked that he
be allowed to meet with the JDA team as soon as possible in order to get this project moving
forward. He stated Alatus had a great team assembled to complete this project.
Noah Schneider, 808 Airy Street in St. Paul, stated in listening to recent JDA meetings, he
understood there was a vision to have an all-electric development on Rice Creek Commons. He
explained he agreed with this, but noted he has not heard how much this will cost and add to
each home price. He reported there was a need for more housing, especially affordable
housing. He asked if these costs were being considered. He feared that the sustainability goals
would greatly impact the affordable units within this development. It was his hope the JDA
could prioritize the additional housing and not let perfect be the enemy of good.
Consent Agenda
None.
Old Business
None.
Public Hearings
a. Planning Case 25-003 and Resolution 2025-002 – Preliminary Plat and Final Plat –
Outlot C, TCAAP – Ramsey County
Director Jagoe stated Ramsey County (“Applicant”) has requested approval of a Preliminary Plat
and Final Plat to subdivide Outlot C (“Subject Property”), often referred to as the “California
Parcel”, of the TCAAP Plat for Rice Creek Commons. The Rice Creek Commons site is in the
northwest corner of the City located to the east of U.S. Highway 10 and I-35W, north of
Highway 96, west of the Arden Hills Army Training Site, and south of County Road I.
Director Jagoe reported the purpose of this platting process is for dedication of the public road
right-of-way for the Spine Road. Two large Outlots would be created as part of the plat for the
future Rice Creek Commons development. These Outlots would be further subdivided and
replatted at the time of the future development. The current platting process is not associated
with any specific development on the site. A copy of the proposed Preliminary and Final Plat
named “Rice Creek Commons Second Addition” was reviewed with the JDA. The following is a
description of the proposed Outlots and right-of-way dedication on the plat:
• Outlot A = 93.25 acres (4,062,028 s.f.)
o This parcel will be further subdivided and developed in the future as part of the Rice
Creek Commons development.
• Outlot B = 252.88 acres (11,015,634 s.f.)
o This parcel will be further subdivided and developed in the future as part of the Rice
Creek Commons development
• Rice Creek Boulevard Right-of-Way = 25.92 acres (1,128,912 s.f.)
Overall Subject Property Platted Area = 372.04 acres
Director Jagoe stated future further subdivisions of the newly created Outlot A and Outlot B
within the Rice Creek Commons development area would be brought forward for review by the
Joint Development Authority (JDA) in accordance with the TCAAP Redevelopment Code (TRC).
Director Jagoe commented further on the Plan Evaluation and offered the following Findings of
Fact:
• The former Twin Cities Army Ammunitions Plant (TCAAP) site is in the northwest corner
of the city located to the east of U.S. Highway 10 and I-35W, north of Highway 96, west
of the Arden Hills Army Training Site, and south of County Road I.
• Ramsey County has requested a Preliminary Plat and Final Plat of the TCAAP, Outlot C
site in order to subdivide the parcel for delineation and dedication of the public right-of
way for the Spine Road.
• The current platting process is not associated with any specific development on the site.
• The future subdivision and replatting of Outlots A & B - Rice Creek Commons Second
Addition for the Rice Creek Commons development would be evaluated at that time
based on all applicable provisions and regulations in the City Code and the TCAAP
Redevelopment Code.
• The proposed Preliminary Plat and Final Plat are consistent with the Arden Hills Zoning
Map, TCAAP Regulating Plan, and the 2040 Comprehensive Plan.
Director Jagoe reviewed the options available to the JDA, noting staff recommended approval
of JDA Planning Case 25-003 and adopt Resolution 2025-002 for a Preliminary Plat and Final Plat
of Outlot C a 372.04 acre parcel within Rice Creek Commons, based on the findings of fact and
the submitted plans, as amended by the conditions in the September 9, 2025 Report to the
Joint Development Authority Board:
1. The Applicant shall record the Final Plat with Ramsey County within sixty (60) days of
the JDA’s approval and a copy of the recorded plat shall be provided to the City.
2. All items identified in the September 2, 2025, City PW/Engineering Division memo shall
be addressed prior to the recording of the Final Plat. All comments shall be adopted
herein by reference.
Chair Wicklund opened the public hearing at 5:59 p.m.
Ian Adams, 1328 Watson Avenue in St. Paul, thanked the JDA for their service and for allowing
him to speak. He questioned why it was advantageous for the JDA to pursue another developer,
given that the Alatus contract had expired. He suggested the JDA consider hiring a real estate or
legal professional that has experience in doing projects close to $1 billion to negotiate with
Alatus to see if a deal could be struck. He encouraged the JDA to reduce friction instead of
increasing power as this project moves forward. He stated the United States was behind when
it came to building costs compared to Europe.
Chair Wicklund closed the public hearing at 6:02 p.m.
Commissioner McGuire thanked staff for all of their efforts on this matter. She asked if this
action was for platting to allow the public road right of way to be installed, which was a basic
step to move this project forward. Director Jagoe reported this was the case. She noted this
process would dedicate the public right of way for the spine road and would allow the County
to continue with their design plans and construction in 2026.
Commissioner McGuire stated she appreciated how this action would move the project
forward.
Commissioner Weber expressed concern with the fact the proposed right of way would be 130
to 140 feet wide. He was of the opinion this width was exceptionally wide. Director Jagoe
reported the 130 to 140 foot width was correct noting this aligns with the TRC and would allow
for the trails, public sidewalks and roadway.
Commissioner Weber indicated he would have liked to review the 60% design plans. He was of
the opinion 100 feet would have been adequate for the trail, sidewalk and roadway right of
way. He did not believe the County should be taking more than they needed, even if this was
only 10 to 20 feet on each side of the roadway. He feared this was wasted space. Director Jagoe
commented the standard the County was proposing for the right of way corridor meets the TRC
standards. She indicated the tree plantings, utility installation, street lighting, sidewalks, right of
way, and roadway does cover the proposed expanse. She anticipated the County could come
back to the JDA with design plans for the roadway corridor.
Commissioner Weber stated he would like to see the plans to ensure the JDA was not over
dedicating.
Chair Wicklund commented he would like to see the plans.
Commissioner Monson explained the corridor has to be this wide because the TRC requires it.
Director Jagoe indicated this was the case.
Commissioner Monson reported if the corridor was to be narrowed, adjustments would have to
be made to the TRC. Director Jagoe explained standards would have to be reviewed to see
where adjustments could be made.
Commissioner Monson stated a traffic study was completed for this project. Director Jagoe
indicated a traffic study was completed through the AUAR process.
Commissioner Monson inquired if the proposed roadway width was necessary for the traffic
that would be flowing through this area. Director Jagoe explained she did not have the
engineering background to answer this question. However, she understood the layers of
amenities included along this corridor would require 130 to 140 feet of right of way.
John Mazzitello, Deputy Director of Public Works for Ramsey County, introduced himself to the
JDA. He explained he designed all of the construction projects for Ramsey County. He reported
he was the project manager for the spine road. He stated the right of way was established
based on the need of the infrastructure that needs to be built with the spine road that includes
the roadway width, curb and gutter, storm drainage, boulevard, sidewalk, trails and lighting. In
addition, to having space for a district energy or geothermal component.
Commissioner Monson questioned if this roadway would be wide enough to handle the level of
traffic that would be flowing through this area. Mr. Masatello indicated he was comfortable
with the proposed roadway width for the traffic that would be generated by the site.
Commissioner Monson stated she appreciated having this information and thanked Mr.
Mazzitello for addressing the JDA.
Motion by Commissioner Weber seconded by Commissioner McGuire to approve Planning Case
JDA Planning Case 25-003 and adopt Resolution 2025-002 for a Preliminary Plat and Final Plat of
Outlot C a 372.04 acre parcel within Rice Creek Commons, based on the findings of fact and the
submitted plans, as amended by the conditions in the September 9, 2025 Report to the Joint
Development Authority Board.
Commissioner Monson explained being able to put the spine road in is key to any future
development. She understood the history of this project and indicated the JDA was doing its
best to get this project across the finish line. She reported the plan was to move forward with
the construction of the spine road in 2026. She discussed how the JDA had new faces and these
individuals would continue to work to move this project forward.
Commissioner McGuires stated Ramsey County was in the budgeting process right now and
supported this item coming forward. She indicated the County Board was aligned as a Board in
getting this project done.
Motion carried.
New Business
a. Approve Revised Sustainability Design Guidelines
Director Mitchell stated at the August JDA work session, the JDA reviewed updates from the
Energy Advisory Committee and consultants, including proposed revisions to the Sustainability
Design Guidelines. These revisions clarify language and requirements around electric vehicle
chargers.
Commissioner McGuire commented she believed these guidelines were a great step forward
and reflect the values of both the County and JDA.
Commissioner Weber assured the public that the energy committee had considered the cost of
the proposed sustainability guidelines. He indicated this was a big concern and noted Ryan
Companies reviewed and provided the JDA with feedback on the sustainability process, noting
no major hurdles were reported.
Commissioner Jebens-Singh explained these guidelines were revisited in order to build a
process that walks along side any future developers and meets with them with the technical
guidance that was necessary, while also having ways to request waivers.
Commissioner Monson indicated when it came to the sustainability guidelines, the JDA was
pragmatic while also trying to do big things. She was disappointed that there was a narrative
that sustainability was in contrast to affordability. She reported experts have been brought in to
assist the JDA with this project. She commented on how much residents in Arden Hills were
paying for energy bills each year. She discussed how important it was for homes to have tight
envelopes in order to reduce energy costs.
Motion by Commissioner McGuire seconded by Commissioner Jebens-Singh to approve the
revised Sustainability Design Guidelines. Motion carried.
b. Review Draft Request for Interest
Director Mitchell stated a Request for Information (RFI) has been drafted for JDA review and
approval. As stated in the RFI document, its purpose is to gain information to inform a future
solicitation for development at Rice Creek Commons. The Anticipated Timeline section is not
yet filled in as the timing may vary depending on the need for revisions or additional
promotion. Staff will distribute the RFI through channels including but not limited to
DemandStar, the Rice Creek Commons newsletter, and RiceCreekCommons.com.
Commissioner McGuire commented she was curious to see what new interests there may be in
this site and what new ideas people may have. She supported the JDA moving forward with an
RFI. She questioned how long the RFI process would take. Director Mitchell proposed keeping
the RFI process open for four weeks, noting there would always be an option to extend.
Commissioner Weber stated he was pleased to see the RFI got put together so quickly. He
noted he had no proposed changes.
Commissioner Jebens-Singh indicated the RFI was drafted after considering the sustainability
goals and missions for this project. She explained the JDA was interested in learning if there
were developers that would engage with this project. She appreciated the fact that all founding
documents have been put in one place as this would provide all future developers with the
goals and requirements for this development, which included having at least 20% of the total
housing units will be affordable at 60% AMI or below and 10% of the total for sale housing will
be eligible for Ramsey County down payment assistance. She thanked staff for the quick
turnaround on the RFI. She indicated the JDA was being mindful and responsible as this project
moves forward.
Commissioner Monson inquired if staff should draft a question for Page 9 that addresses the
challenges surrounding district energy within the RFI.
Chair Wicklund supported staff adding this question to the RFI.
Commissioner Weber indicated district energy was important to him and he wanted to see this
move forward.
Commissioner Monson explained she wanted to see district energy called out to ensure
developers understand this was a requirement and that feedback would be helpful. Director
Mitchell noted district energy was mentioned on Page 6 and was addressed within the
sustainability guidelines. She suggested a sentence be written into the RFI that encourages
developers to read the supporting documents, which would include the Sustainability
Guidelines.
Commissioner Monson suggested further language be written into the RFI that addresses how
the developers will create foot traffic. Director Mitchell stated she could draft language to
address this matter.
Commissioner McGuire supported this recommendation noting she wanted to see this
development becoming a walkable community.
Commissioner Jebens-Singh recommended the language speak to all levels of accessibility and
not just walking.
Commissioner Monson inquired if the JDA would be able to speak to the developers who
respond to the RFI in person. She commented she was interested in speaking with a developer
that has a unique vision for this property. She suggested this be a recommendation but not a
requirement. She recommended the City use its channels to advertise the RFI.
Chair Wicklund questioned how fast the RFI would be put out the door. Director Mitchell
indicated she was confident the RFI could be put out prior to the next JDA meeting.
Chair Wicklund stated if this was the case, he would like the JDA to receive an update on the RFI
process at the October JDA meeting. He discussed how this project moved from 10% to 20%
affordable units as well as moving from 1,460 to 1,900 housing units. He understood the pace
of the development may not feel great for everyone, but stated the JDA would continue to
move this project forward.
Motion by Commissioner Jebens-Singh seconded by Commissioner Weber to approve Request
for Information as amended. Motion carried.
c. Discuss Community Engagement Proposal
Director Mitchell stated there was a discussion at the August JDA meeting about organizing
digital informational sessions instead of an in-person community event this fall. Some of the
advantages of an online format include more accessibility to residents, less time commitment
for both residents and staff, and the ability to post the recording online for viewing at any time.
After discussing with consultants, staff propose organizing a webinar focused on sustainability
and clean energy that will include a presentation on the advances made over the past two years
and time for questions and answers. This webinar could also include a review of how residents
can learn more about the project and a request for topic suggestions for future info sessions.
The webinar would be advertised on the project website and through the newsletter, and the
recording would also be posted on the website. If the webinar is successful, then the JDA may
consider repeating this format on other topics.
Director Mitchell explained staff has noted comments on the materials available on the project
website and are working to strategize, within technical constraints, on how to ensure as much
information is readily accessible as possible. Residents are encouraged to use the comment box
on RiceCreekCommons.com or reach out to JDA members or staff to request information or
documents.
Chair Wicklund stated doing an electronic webinar would save time and could assist with
focusing the topic for the event. He questioned what success would look like for this type of
event.
Commissioner McGuire explained she loved the idea of an informational webinar. She
suggested the JDA consider hosting at least two webinar events.
Commissioner Weber commented he was interested in documents being readily available on
the Rice Creek Commons website. He hoped that people would attend the webinar events and
come forward with questions. He believed success would be people asking questions and
providing new topics.
Commissioner Jebens-Singh stated a webinar like this would allow for multiple audiences to
engage with this topic in a transparent manner over time. She asked how these events would
overlap with the RFI. Director Mitchell indicated she would be open to feedback from the JDA
on this, noting the event could be geared towards the public, or RFI responders were also
welcome to join.
Commissioner Monson explained she liked the idea of surveying people about future topics.
She anticipated these events would be successful. She recommended the webinar event be
well marketed and suggested the event be open to the public.
Chair Wicklund asked how urgent it was to get this project completed. He questioned if staff
could begin working out details and the JDA could finalize the plans for the webinar in October.
Commissioner McGuire wanted to see the website updated as quickly as possible and noted
she could wait for the webinar to be finalized in October.
Commissioner Weber stated the RFI was the priority and he did not believe the webinar had to
inform the RFI.
Commissioner Jebens-Singh commented she liked the idea of making sure staff can stagger this
work in order to get the RFI out first and that the webinar would be finalized in October.
Commissioner Monson stated she would like to see the community engagement done before
the end of the year because people want to know what’s going on.
Director Mitchell inquired if the JDA wanted to see the material from the consultants before it
is released.
Chair Wicklund recommended the content be reviewed on October 6 before being released to
the public. He suggested the webinar be 30 to 35 minutes, noting success to him would be
having at least 50 people in attendance. He encouraged the JDA members to consider what
topic should be covered in the second webinar.
d. Review Road Map
Director Mitchell reviewed the Road Map with the JDA.
Administrative Director’s Report
Director Mitchell stated she had nothing further for the JDA.
Development Director’s Report
Director Jagoe stated she had nothing further for the JDA.
Commissioner Updates
Commissioner McGuire thanked staff for all of their efforts to keep this project moving forward.
Commissioner Weber indicated he ran for city council in order to move the Rice Creek
Commons projects forward and to get affordable housing in Arden Hills. He stated this project
remains a high priority for him and he thanked the public for voicing their concerns.
Commissioner Jebens-Singh thanked the public for voicing their concerns surrounding
affordable housing. She indicated she has felt the same frustrations but noted the County and
City were in alignment when it came to affordable housing and a commitment to moving this
project forward.
Adjournment
Meeting adjourned at 7:19 pm.
Approved _____________________________________ _______________________
Jon Wicklund, Chair Date
Joint Development Authority
Worksession Meeting
Monday, October 6, 2025
Arden Hills City Council Chambers
Minutes
5:30 pm
Roll Call
Joint Development Authority: Chair Jon Wicklund, Commissioner Tara Jebens-Singh,
Commissioner Kurt Weber, Commissioner Mary Jo McGuire, Commissioner Tena Monson
Also present: Jessica Jagoe (Arden Hills); Ella Mitchell (Ramsey County), Rachel Tierney
(Kennedy & Graven)
Roll call taken.
Public Input
Rich Straumann, 4380 Arden View Court, explained he has been a resident since 1974. He
commented on the mission and goals of Active Living and discussed the value of the Rice Creek
Regional Trail which was ran along the northwest portion of Rice Creek Commons. He reviewed
the trails that surround this development and urged the JDA to consider trails that would
integrate physical activity throughout Rice Creek Commons.
Lynn Diaz, 1143 Ingerson Road, stated she would like to see individual lots available for home
building within Rice Creek Commons. She discussed how selling the land to developers limits
options for future homeowners that would like to build their own sustainable home.
New Business
a. Rice Creek Boulevard Infrastructure Improvements Update
Director Mitchell stated following the approval of the plat for Rice Creek Boulevard (formerly
known as the spine road) at the September JDA meeting, Ramsey County staff and consultants
from Kimley Horn have been working on the infrastructure improvements. She reported Kimley
Horn had representatives in attendance to provide an overview of the schedule, plans, and
regulatory agency coordination for the proposed public infrastructure improvements.
Larina DeWalt, Ramsey County staff member, introduced herself and the team that has been
working on the Rice Creek Boulevard infrastructure improvements.
Eric Fosmo, Kimley Horn representative, introduced himself to the JDA and reviewed the
project schedule for Rice Creek Boulevard. He explained construction was slated to begin in the
summer of 2026 with the project being completed in the fall of 2027. He commented on the
final design plans and described how the roadway would transition from five to three lanes. The
location of the two roundabouts was discussed. The proposed utility corridor and streetscape
improvements were reviewed with the JDA.
Commissioner Weber explained he would like to see the public utilities under the trails rather
than private utilities in order to ensure the trails are properly maintained going forward.
Commissioner McGuire questioned if the proposed walking and biking paths were adequate.
Mr. Fosmo explained different options have been considered for the trails and noted the
proposed paths fit within the TRC. He noted he could bring back alternatives if this was the
desire of the JDA. He explained a separate trail with sidewalks for pedestrians could be
considered.
Commissioner McGuire stated she would like to see a dedicated path for bikers separate from
the sidewalk for pedestrians.
Commissioner Weber indicated the Midtown Greenway would be worth looking at for their
pedestrian and bike paths. He asked how the maintenance would be managed for the bike
paths and trails within this development. John Mazzitello, Ramsey County Public Works
Director, stated this would be part of cooperative agreement between the County and the City.
He indicated the trees would be the City’s responsibility.
Commissioner Monson commented she was not in favor of bikes and cars sharing the road
when they do not have to. She supported there being separation for the bike path. She asked if
the TRC would limit the function of the sidewalks and trails. Director Jagoe indicated the TRC
was followed for the streetscape and noted she would be following up on this item to see if
there was any room for flexibility or changes.
Commissioner Monson inquired if the proposed roundabout would manage the traffic coming
into the development if the proposed Costco site were turned into a sports facility or concert
venue and now a lot of people would be coming into the site all at once. Mr. Fosmo reported
those types of uses were super unique and he would want to know what type of events the
tournament center would be holding. He stated this would be a hard question for him to
answer without this information. He indicated he had the flexibility to make some adjustments
within the right of way. Mr. Mazzitello reported the preliminary models did consider all of the
land uses including a big box retail, which was the most intensive traffic developers. He stated
as he gets more detailed information on users the models can be altered and updated.
Mr. Fosmo further discussed the plans for the Rice Creek crossing and regional trails. He noted
the bridge would match the current aesthetics.
Commissioner Weber stated it would be nice to consider a City indicator on this bridge.
Commissioner Monson supported this recommendation.
Commissioner Jebens-Singh explained this property was part of a larger watershed district and
asked if this project was being considered within a broader plan. Mr. Fosmo reported there is a
comprehensive stormwater management plan (CSMP) that was completed for Rice Creek
Commons and noted he would continue to coordinate with the Rice Creek Watershed District.
Mr. Fosmo reviewed the location of potential environmental/protected species noting he
would continue to work through this process with the proper regulatory agencies. He
commented further on the regulatory agencies that he was having to coordinate with for this
project which included the US Army, MPCA/EPA, DNR and the Rice Creek Watershed District.
Mr. Mazzitello reported all of the individuals within these agencies has been very cooperative
and support the Rice Creek Commons development moving forward.
Commissioner McGuire requested further information regarding the PFA’s testing. Ms. DeWalt
discussed the PFAS testing that would be required going forward by the EPA given that this was
former US Army property. She reported screening would begin this fall and test results would
be available early next year.
Chair Wicklund questioned what the biggest miss was within the plans at this time. Mr.
Mazzitello stated the biggest lift within this project was the relocation of the TGRS system.
Chair Wicklund inquired if there were any items within the plan that should be amended now
before this project moves forward. Mr. Fosmo commented he did not have any
recommendations at this time. He indicated coordinating with the Army on the TGRS system
was the only hold up at this time.
b. Review Sustainability Information Session Presentation
Director Mitchell stated a draft slideshow for the Sustainability Information Session was being
provided to the JDA for feedback. After getting feedback from the JDA, staff will make edits,
refine existing content, and clean up formatting. She reported early November was being
targeted for this virtual informational session due to schedules and to allow time for
promotion.
Commissioner Monson thanked staff for their efforts on the sustainability slideshow. She stated
this information was being presented just how she envisioned and expected. She suggested the
value of the proposed development be further addressed within the slideshow.
Chair Wicklund stated the JDA wanted to communicate with the City’s constituents regarding
the sustainability efforts being pursued through this development and noted this would be
done via webinar.
Commissioner Jebens-Singh supported residents being allowed to submit questions whenever
they view the webinar and that these questions be forwarded to staff.
Chair Wicklund questioned who would be presenting the slideshow within the webinar.
Director Mitchell reported this would be done by herself and Rick Carter along with Ryan or
Michael from Evergreen Energy who would address district energy.
Chair Wicklund stated he believed it would be nice to have a JDA Commissioner open the
webinar.
Commissioner Monson volunteered to open the webinar on behalf of the JDA.
Commissioner McGuire suggested the introduction include information regarding the
partnership between the City and the County through the JDA.
Commissioner Jebens-Singh recommended the presenters walk through the presentation with
an individual not on the JDA to see if the information being presented was too technical in
nature, in case some of the information needs to be further explained.
Commissioner Weber commended staff for pulling this slideshow presentation so quickly and
comprehensively.
Commissioner McGuire encouraged staff not to use too many acronyms within the
presentation as the public may not be familiar.
Commissioner Monson recommended a map of the project area be included in this slideshow.
Commissioner Jebens-Singh suggested staff provide links to more detailed information
regarding the JDA’s sustainability efforts be provided for those individuals that would like to
take a deeper dive into this topic.
c. Communications Update
Director Mitchell stated Goff Public worked with Ramsey County to prepare and distribute the
fall Rice Creek Commons newsletter. The newsletter was sent to 3,398 subscribers on Monday,
September 29. Topics included the release of the Request for Information, the approval of the
plat for Rice Creek Boulevard, and a construction update on Outlot A. The newsletter had a 2%
click rate and 19% open rate, which is similar to the last newsletter. There have been three
recent inquiries through the Rice Creek Commons microsite contact portal on topics including
opportunities for development, plans for senior housing, and construction at Outlot A. Staff
responded to each inquiry directly.
Commissioner McGuire requested staff forward the most recent newsletter to her.
Chair Wicklund asked if anyone has responded to the RFI to date. Director Mitchell stated the
RFI was available on the County’s webpage and she had reached out to several project partners
to see if they could assist with distributing the RFI. She noted she had received on RFI response
to date. She indicated the deadline for submittal was October 24, 2025.
d. Review Road Map
Director Mitchell reviewed the Road Map with the JDA.
Administrative Director’s Report
Director Mitchell stated she submitted for precertification for LEED for Communities last week.
She reported the goal still remains to achieve platinum certification.
Development Director’s Report
Director Jagoe introduced the City’s new Community Development Director Jacob Reilly to the
JDA.
Commissioner Updates
Commissioner Monson asked how conversations were going with the Army regarding the TGRS
system and Building 116. Director Mitchell stated Larina and John were having the
conversations with the Army.
Commissioner Monson supported the JDA having a conversations regarding Building 116 to
ensure this building is moved.
Commissioner Weber supported the JDA having this conversation as well.
Commissioner Jebens-Singh indicated she was uncertain who was responsible for Building 116
and she had no objection to the JDA holding a conversation.
Commissioner McGuire agreed and stated the Ramsey County Board would be reaffirming their
commitment to Rice Creek Commons at their meeting tomorrow.
Adjournment
Meeting adjourned at 6:56 pm.
Approved _____________________________________ _______________________
Jon Wicklund, Chair Date
Joint Development Authority
TCAAP Redevelopment Project
Joint Development Authority
TCAAP Redevelopment Project
AGENDA ITEM 4
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 3, 2025
TO: Joint Development Authority Board of Commissioners
FROM: Directors Mitchell and Jagoe
SUBJECT: Public Input
The public is invited to provide input. Comments will be limited to three minutes per person.
Joint Development Authority
TCAAP Redevelopment Project
Joint Development Authority
TCAAP Redevelopment Project
AGENDA ITEM 8a
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 3, 2025
TO: Joint Development Authority Board of Commissioners
FROM: Director Mitchell and Larina DeWalt, Ramsey County
SUBJECT: Receive Building 116 Presentation
At the October 2025 JDA work session, JDA members requested an overview of Building 116, which is
located on the Rice Creek Commons property. Staff have prepared a presentation with background
information and considerations for JDA discussion.
Attachment: Building 116 Overview Presentation
Action Requested: Staff request for JDA consideration:
• Affirm Building 116 as an existing condition in upcoming RFP
• Affirm any modifications would need to be incorporated into negotiations with future
development partners
RICE CREEK COMMONS
BUILDING 116 OVERVIEW
JOINT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
NOVEMBER 3rd, 2025
Building 116 -Former Twin Cities Army
Ammunition Plant (TCAAP)
Building 116
Building 116 – Overview
Originally constructed in 1942 as a water treatment plant
Building 116 is:
Located on Ramsey County property
Owned by the Army, who are also the Responsible Party for groundwater contamination at the site
Operated by contractors for the Army
Building 116 is a primary component of the Boundary Groundwater Recovery System (BGRS) treatment system
BGRS is part of the TCAAP Groundwater Recovery System (TGRS)
Building 116 – Overview
TGRS was established to treat
groundwater in 1989
The BGRS captures groundwater
contaminated with volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) at the
southwestern boundary of the RCC
site
BGRS extraction wells along the
southwestern property line send
water through a network of pipes
to Building 116, which houses the
groundwater treatment system
Treated water is then piped and
discharged to a gravel pit to the
east of RCC located on the Arden
Hills Army Training Site (AHATS)
TCAAP Groundwater Recovery System (TGRS)
Building 116
*Exhibit from Army TGRS Optimization Plan
California
Parcel
ARDEN
HILLS
ARMY
TRAINING
SITE
Building 116 – Roles/Responsibilities
Ownership Authority/Approvals Primary Governing Documents
Site Ramsey County
County
JDA
Others as required
Property Deed
Environmental Covenant (EC)
TCAAP Regulating Code (TRC)
TGRS Army
Army
EPA
MPCA
Property Deed
Environmental Covenant (EC)
Federal Facility Agreement (FFA )
Record of Decision (ROD)
Building 116 Army
Army
EPA
MPCA
Property Deed
Environmental Covenant (EC)
Federal Facility Agreement (FFA)
Record of Decision (ROD)
Building 116 – Development Considerations
Building 116 is an existing condition and was listed as such in
the 2016 RFP for a development partner.
2023 Term Sheet included as an agreed-upon term:
“Building 116: The JDA will support the developer’s exploration of
the feasibility of moving Building 116 off the site, including
identifying a way to pay for the relocation.”
Previous development discussions have included the following:
Location
Aesthetics
Space (building size)
Public perception (air emissions)
Energy Capture (district energy)
Building 116 –
Development Considerations
Location – Building 116 is located
in an area zoned for open space in
the TRC
Aesthetics – Building 116 has not
undergone any significant updates
since it was constructed
Space – It is possible that the
building is oversized for the
current system
Building 116 - Development Considerations
Public perception of safety due to air emissions
2023 Army optimization project significantly reduced emissions from
air stripping towers
Only the BGRS (lower levels of impacted groundwater) is pumped to
Building 116
The SGRS treats the more heavily impacted water
The Army is required to complete updated emissions modeling and
sampling before any construction of homes or businesses on Rice Creek
Commons
This work will be overseen by regulators to ensure that emissions will not pose a
risk to future residents or visitors of Rice Creek Commons
Building 116 - Development Considerations
Energy Capture
Consistent water flow of TGRS is a potential source of thermal energy
for district energy system
2015 Energy Integration and Resiliency Framework (EIRF)first proposed
and analyzed this concept
Exploratory conversations with the Army were generally favorable, but
paused around 2018
2024 Clean Energy Analysis Report modeled of TRGS energy capture:
This energy capture could meet 30% of site heating load and 13% of site
cooling load
Estimated $6.6 million in capital cost savings due to fewer geothermal
wells needed
Future of Building 116
The groundwater remedy is mandated by the federal government under
a 1997 EPA Record of Decision (ROD) and subsequent amendments.
There is currently no anticipated end date for the operation of the TGRS.
There has been coordination with the Army and regulators as it relates
to TGRS modifications necessary for the Rice Creek Boulevard
infrastructure project
Process is paused due to government shut down
Any modification of Building 116 would require approval from
Army, EPA, and MPCA, at a minimum
Unknown associated cost and schedule impacts
JDA Considerations
Staff request for JDA consideration
Affirm Building 116 as an existing condition in upcoming RFP
Affirm any modifications/relocations would need to be incorporated into
negotiations with future development partners (consistent with 2016 RFP)
Joint Development Authority
TCAAP Redevelopment Project
Joint Development Authority
TCAAP Redevelopment Project
AGENDA ITEM 8b
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 3, 2025
TO: Joint Development Authority Board of Commissioners
FROM: Directors Mitchell and Jagoe
SUBJECT: Adopt 2026 JDA Budget
The proposed 2026 JDA budget is presented for adoption, consistent with the budget processes outlined
in the Joint Powers Agreement.
For informational purposes, an overview of JDA expenditures for 2023 and 2024 is provided. Preliminary
expenditures for January 1, 2025, to September 30, 2025, are also provided, though note that these
numbers are subject to change due to potential future reimbursements and anticipated invoices.
Attachments:
•Proposed 2026 JDA Budget
•Overview of 2023-2025 expenditures
Requested Action: Adopt the 2026 JDA Budget
JDA Budget 2026
Estimated Revenues
Grants
JDA Application fees
JDA Permit fees
Contributions from Ramsey County 381,100.00$
Reserves
Developer escrow/fees
Miscellaneous revenues
TOTAL 381,100.00$
Estimated Expenditures
Personnel services
Contract Services
Legal 60,000.00$
Engineering
Fiscal/Audit (including Fiscal Agent)60,000.00$
Planning
Administrative 3,600.00$
Communications & Community Engagement 50,000.00$
Green Energy & Sustainability 200,000.00$
Services other than personnel or consultants
Supplies and materials
Office administration
Capital outlay (office rent, computer equipment, etc.)
Payment of invoices for services to the JDA provided by a Party
Insurance 2,500.00$
Miscellaneous expenditures 5,000.00$
TOTAL 381,100.00$
2026
JDA Expenditures Budget Actuals Budget Actuals Budget
Preliminary
Actuals
(Jan 1-Sept 30)
Budget
Public Finance Consultant 60,000$ 49,500$ 60,000$ -$ 60,000$
Legal 60,000$ 30,468$ 60,000$ 21,515$ 60,000$ 86,715$ 60,000$
Communications and
Community Engagement 170,000$ 24,661$ 50,000$ 19,899$ 50,000$ 25,800$ 50,000$
Green Energy Consultant 125,000$ 196,778$ 224,229$ 126,544$ 200,000$
Insurance 2,035$ 2,035$ 2,035$ 2,038$ 2,500$ 2,041$ 2,500$
Meeting Expense 3,600$ 3,600$ 3,600$ 4,012$ 3,600$ 2,334$ 3,600$
Contingency 5,000$ 809$ 5,000$ -$ 5,000$ -$ 5,000$
Total 240,635$ 61,574$ 305,635$ 293,741$ 405,329$ 243,434$ 381,100$
2023 2024 2025
Joint Development Authority
TCAAP Redevelopment Project
Joint Development Authority
TCAAP Redevelopment Project
AGENDA ITEM 8c
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 3, 2025
TO: Joint Development Authority Board of Commissioners
FROM: Directors Mitchell and Jagoe
SUBJECT: Review Road Map
The Road Map has been updated to include recent schedule updates and proposed dates for 2026.
Attachment:
2025-2026 JDA Road Map
Month Date Meeting/Action or Deadline Topics or Notes
JDA Commissioner Onboarding City/County onboarding of respective new commissioners
21 JDA Meeting Organizational Items, Sustainability Design Guidelines, Outlot
A Concept Review
3 JDA Work Session 2024 JDA Annual Report, Legislative and Communications
Update
15
17 JDA Meeting Outlot A Entitlements Review, Committee Assignments
27 JDA Advisory Committee Meeting Discuss Development Agreement
7 JDA Meeting Outlot A Development Agreement, Budget Review
9 JDA Advisory Committee Meeting Discuss Development Plans
16 Energy Advisory Committee Meeting Onboarding
1
5 JDA Meeting Budget Amendment
7 JDA Advisory Committee Meeting Discuss Development Agreement
14 JDA Advisory Committee Meeting Discuss Development Agreement
16 Energy Advisory Committee Meeting District Energy
30 JDA Advisory Committee Meeting Discuss Development Agreement
2 JDA Meeting
4 JDA Advisory Committee Meeting Discuss Development Agreement
11 JDA Advisory Committee Meeting Discuss Development Agreement
18 JDA Advisory Committee Meeting Discuss Development Agreement
23 JDA Advisory Committee Meeting Discuss Development Agreement
25 Special JDA Meeting Consider extension to Preliminary Development Agreement
30
Jan
Rice Creek Commons 2025 Roadmap
Feb
Deadline: JDA Annual Report due to City and County
Deadline: Draft 2026 JDA Budget
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Expiration: Preliminary Development Agreement with Alatus
2 Special Closed JDA Meeting Litigation
7 JDA Work Session Solicitation Process
21 Special Closed JDA Meeting Litigation
23 Energy Advisory Committee Meeting Updates
Aug 4 JDA Work Session Solicitation Discussion, Energy Advisory Committee Updates
1 Deadline: Coordinate JDA Budget with City and County budget processes
9 JDA Meeting Request for Information Review
26
6 JDA Work Session Infrastructure Update, Sustainability Webinar Review
24
3 JDA Meeting Adopt 2026 JDA budget, Building 116 Presentation
13 Sustainability Webinar
14
15 Deadline: Report back on City/County approval of JDA budget
Dec 1 JDA Work Session RFI Discussion [tentative]
Sept
Jul
Oct
Nov
Request for Information (RFI) released
Initial RFI response deadline
Extended RFI response deadline
Month Date Meeting/Action or Deadline Topics or Notes
Jan 5 JDA Meeting Organizational Items
2 JDA Work Session 2025 JDA Annual Report
15
Mar 2 JDA Meeting
Apr 6 JDA Work Session
1
4 JDA Meeting
Jun 1 JDA Work Session
Jul 6 JDA Meeting
Aug 3 JDA Work Session
1 Deadline: Coordinate JDA Budget with City and County budget processes
TBD JDA Meeting
Oct 5 JDA Work Session
2 JDA Meeting
15 Deadline: Report back on City/County approval of JDA budget
Dec 7 JDA Work Session
Sept
Nov
Deadline: Draft 2027 JDA Budget
May
Rice Creek Commons 2026 Roadmap
Feb
Deadline: JDA Annual Report due to City and County
Joint Development Authority
TCAAP Redevelopment Project
Joint Development Authority
TCAAP Redevelopment Project
AGENDA ITEM 9
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 3, 2025
TO: Joint Development Authority Board of Commissioners
FROM: Director Mitchell
SUBJECT: Administrative Director’s Report
A verbal update will be provided by staff.
Joint Development Authority
TCAAP Redevelopment Project
Joint Development Authority
TCAAP Redevelopment Project
AGENDA ITEM 10
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 3, 2025
TO: Joint Development Authority Board of Commissioners
FROM: Director Jagoe
SUBJECT: Development Director’s Report
A verbal update will be provided by Director Jagoe.