My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2012-02-21_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Housing Redevelopment Authority
>
Minutes
>
2012
>
2012-02-21_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/22/2012 11:15:33 AM
Creation date
3/22/2012 11:15:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Housing Redevelopment Authority
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
2/21/2012
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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
HRA Meeting <br />Minutes – Tuesday, February 21, 2012 <br />Page 9 <br />1 <br />Suggested revisions were detailed in the written report, and included increased allocations to <br />2 <br />the multi-family housing program; doubling of energy audit funds; additional funding to the <br />3 <br />NEP program to cover personnel costs and recognize Mr. Coughlin’s fifth year with the NEP <br />4 <br />program and allowing for some additional compensation to recognize his positive merits; as <br />5 <br />well as increased supply costs. Areas reduced included allocations to the annual Living <br />6 <br />Smarter home and garden fair due to staff reassignments; elimination of the “Live/Work” <br />7 <br />program; with an additional $50,000 now in reserve funds. Mr. Trudgeon questioned the need <br />8 <br />for such a healthy reserve fund; however, he suggested that it remain in place until the Board <br />9 <br />completed its strategic planning exercise. <br />10 <br />11 <br />Motion: Member Pust moved, seconded by Member Lee approved the final 2012 HRA <br />12 <br />Budget as presented. <br />13 <br />14 <br />Ayes: 5 <br />15 <br />Nays: 0 <br />16 <br />Motion carried. <br />17 <br />18 <br />b.2325 Dale Street/Dale Fire Station <br />19 <br />Mr. Trudgeon summarized the written report; advising that he had held discussions with <br />20 <br />Roseville City Manager Bill Malinen related to the HRA partnering with the City to utilize the <br />21 <br />fire station parcel by assembling land with the adjacent parcel at 2325 Dale Street. Mr. <br />22 <br />Trudgeon advised that, from his perspective, Mr. Malinen was open to the potential; however, <br />23 <br />all parties recognized that the City Council would have final disposition of the property, and <br />24 <br />was anticipating revenue from sale of the fire station parcel. Mr. Trudgeon noted the options <br />25 <br />currently before the HRA: whether to take the next step indicated in the staff report directing <br />26 <br />staff to order an appraisal and initiate negotiations for purchase of 2325 Dale Street; or to not <br />27 <br />move in that direction at all. Mr. Trudgeon noted the significant difference in Ramsey <br />28 <br />County’s assessed value of the parcel and its listing price. <br />29 <br />30 <br />Motion: Member Masche moved, seconded by Member Lee to direct staff to order an <br />31 <br />appraisal and negotiate a purchase agreement for 2325 Dale Street for RHRA Board <br />32 <br />approval at a future meeting. <br />33 <br />34 <br />Member Battisto questioned why the single-family home on this parcel was vacant and opined <br />35 <br />that the list price seemed excessively high when the parcel was less than an acre in size. <br />36 <br />37 <br />Ms. Kelsey advised that the home was vacant as it was an estate. <br />38 <br />39 <br />Member Pust clarified that the motion was in support of preliminary direction to staff, noting <br />40 <br />that no representations had been made to-date or any negotiations undertaken by staff to-date; <br />41 <br />further noting that there had been no discussions with the City Council, other than the initial <br />42 <br />discussion with City Manager Malinen. Member Pust, as a member of the City Council, <br />43 <br />advised that there had been no discussion to-date on whether the City Council was interested in <br />44 <br />assembling their fire station parcel with this one, or in the potential future re-use of the parcels. <br />45 <br />Member Pust emphasized that those discussions would need to happen before any further steps <br />46 <br />were taken. <br />47 <br />48 <br />Member Lee expressed her understanding that this action as only directing staff to seek an <br />49 <br />appraisal to facilitate future consideration and discussion. <br />50 <br />51 <br />Mr. Trudgeon concurred; noting that the results of the appraisal could be the end of the <br />52 <br />conversation. <br />53 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.