CC_Minutes_2012_0723 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting AND Board of Adjustments and Appeals Monday,July 23,2012 Page 43 3) To allow time to step back, stop the rush, and allow Roseville as a suburban community with little space remaining for development. 4) The significant number of people opposed to this proposal. Mr. Strohmeier opined that this was a big deal for the community, and he had heard from numerous people telling him they are opposed to a Wal-Mart locat- ing in Roseville. In his role working with elected officials on a daily basis, Mr. Strohmeier acknowledged the difficult role of the City Council. Mr. Strohmeier concluded by stating, if the proposal should go through, he was in full support of Councilmember Pust's intent to keep public safety concerns in the forefront and to proactively address them. Mayor Roe, as Councilmembers proceeded to deliberate, opined that the prima- ry issue is the condition related to police calls and an agreement for a Security Plan. At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Trudgeon responded that dol- lar figures for infrastructure improvements were provided in the draft Develop- ment Agreement versus percentages, but represented roughly 25%, as negotiat- ed by the parties. Mr. Trudgeon noted that they could be revised at the direction of the City Council; however, staff was recommending this figure based on its review of the potential funds that could be realized if a Chapter 429 process for assessment was followed that would only provide approximately 10% versus 25% as currently negotiated in the Agreement. Even though there could be some cost differential, Mr. Trudgeon advised that staff felt the $400,000 was more than sufficient for Wal-Mart's portion of the redevelopment area. Councilmember McGehee, for the protection of taxpayers, opined that a per- centage would be better; and urged the City Council to change to a percentage rather than a fixed dollar amount. Councilmember McGehee opined that there was nothing in the Development Agreement stating that Wal-Mart had to build on that land, and expressed con- cern that Wal-Mart could hold it as uncompleted or vacant land. Councilmem- ber McGehee alleged that Wal-Mart has a history of vacating buildings and leaving them hard to re-use due to their size and design, as well as not maintain- ing those vacant buildings, and suggested a provision in the Development Agreement that the project had to proceed. Councilmember McGehee sought to provide protection for Roseville residents that should Wal-Mart close after they open for business, the City would have some protection against that possibility. Mr. Trudgeon noted that this meant the land would remain in its current condi- tion; and advised that the project was required to be initiated within one (1) year of approval or the process needed to start over, and if approved tonight, it would become null and void. Mr. Trudgeon noted that Wal-Mart does not yet have