My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2005_0620
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2005
>
CC_Minutes_2005_0620
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:27:29 AM
Creation date
8/19/2005 3:26:15 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
6/20/2005
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
53
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 />City Council Regular Meeting - 06/20/05 <br />Minutes - Page 28 <br /> <br />Roll Call [3.2a and 3.b] <br />Ayes: Schroeder; Maschka and Klausing. <br />Nays: Kough and Ihlan. <br /> <br />6.b <br /> <br />[4.1] Consider a Proposed Contract for Private <br />Redevelopment by and between the City of Roseville <br />and Roseville Twin Lakes, LLC, for Redevelopment of <br />Twin Lakes, Phase I <br />Councilmember Ihlan suggested that, given the significant <br />new provisions to be considered in the proposed <br />Development Contract, recessing and reconvening the <br />meeting on another day may be appropriate. <br /> <br />Mayor Klausing suggested Councilmembers make their <br />closing arguments shorter to preserve time; and if <br />necessary the entire Council could determine if they wished <br />to proceed at this or another time. <br /> <br />[4.1] <br />Gay Reiter, Krass Monroe <br />Ms. Reiter reviewed the provisions of the June 15, 2005, <br />version 6 Draft of the Contract for Private Redevelopment <br />by and between the City of Roseville, MN and Roseville <br />Twin Lakes, LLC. Ms. Reiter reviewed those items <br />representing significant revisions and negotiations since <br />previous term sheet discussions. Councilmembers <br />addressed their questions to each specific area as <br />applicable. <br /> <br />Items discussed included specific timetables set forth as <br />benchmarks for the redeveloper to have control of different <br />parcels; Eminent Domain obligations; previous Council <br />concerns regarding piecemeal development; primary intent <br />and costs of development related to environmental <br />contamination and property acquisitions costs; annual <br />certification of eligible TIF costs to the City by the <br />developer; anticipated return developer is allowed to <br />receive and a cap on assistance as per formula, with the <br />redeveloper allowed to make up to 12.5%, at which time <br />the City shares in any excess profit to provide an incentive <br />to the developer; and land price determination. <br /> <br />Resolution 10317 <br />Proposed Contract <br />for Private <br />Redevelopment by <br />City of Roseville & <br />Roseville Twin <br />Lakes LLC, for <br />redevelopment of <br />Twin Lakes <br />Phase I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.