CC_Minutes_2012_0521 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,May 21,2012 Page 23 Infrastructure Cost Allocation Councilmember McGehee questioned why Wal-Mart was only paying $400,000 for I-35W ramp improvements that are estimated to cost approximately $1.6 million; and why it appears that the City is subsidizing the Wal-Mart Corpora- tion with $10 million of completed infrastructure. Councilmember McGehee further questioned traffic projects; triggers for additional improvements and var- ious interpretations by MnDOT and other traffic engineers; and questioned the accuracy of models and projected calculations. Mr. Trudgeon advised that Wal-Mart's cost allocation had been determined, through significant analysis of various components and expert consultation, at twenty-five percent (25%) of the total interchange costs. Mr. Trudgeon noted that this was not a small, but rather significant, investment on their part, espe- cially when drawing a nexus to this specific development and other occurrences that may make the interchange inadequate. Mr. Trudgeon advised that staff had performed substantial due diligence and negotiations with Wal-Mart to reach this agreed-upon $400,000 amount, and staff was unable to justify any addition- al cost to this developer above that amount. Mr. Trudgeon noted that this figure represented more to the City than a typical assessment from the Chapter 429 process. Councilmember McGehee opined that there would be additional traffic impacts and mitigation that the citizens of Roseville would be required to pay; and fur- ther opined that citizens have already done their share. Mr. Trudgeon advised that there were also other options available to the City for reimbursement of costs from other future property owners and/or developers, as well as the Chapter 429 assessment process. Park Dedication Councilmember McGehee questioned the rationale for accepting $411,115 in park dedication fees as opposed to land owned by Roseville Properties along County Road C and targeted for an addition to Langton Lake Park, including the Oak Forest identified in the 2002 Natural Resources Plan. Councilmember McGehee opined that this agreement not only precluded the City obtaining the land,but also not getting added protection to a portion of Langton Lake. Mr. Trudgeon advised that the Twin Lakes Regulating Plan identified that area for an addition to Langton Lake Park, the decision as to whether to acquire the property or a fee in lieu of had been the decision of the Parks and Recreation Commission after their deliberation of the issue. While not attempting to speak for the Commission, Mr. Trudgeon surmised that the Commission apparently had determined that taking the fee instead of the land, was based on their ability in the future to improve parks with dollars versus land. Mr. Trudgeon noted