Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br />is no reason to <br />retail, office, or housing market is so clearly superior to the retail, <br />housing, and office markets in greenfield, outer ring suburbs such as <br />Woodbury and Blaine that you can be sure the Twin Lakes project will <br />be more profitable than similar greenfield projects. There is every <br />reason to believe just the opposite. By far, most new housing and most <br />new retail are going to the greenfield, outer ring suburbs. Because of <br />more and more rooftops in those outer ring suburbs, those greenfields <br />can be just as profitable for developers, if not more so, than the <br />Roseville trade area. And when two potential sites for housing and retail <br />development are equally profitable, and one is a brownfield and one is a <br />greenfield, developers will rationally avoid the higher, front-end costs <br />and larger risks entailed in redeveloping a brownfield in Roseville and <br />go instead to the less expensive greenfield. And that is why, without a <br />TIF subsidy for Twin Lakes, you will continue to see large-scale <br />housing and retail projects develop EITHER with substantial TIF <br />assistance in St. Paul, Minneapolis, Burnsville, St. Louis Park, and other <br />cities providing redevelopment assistance OR such projects will leapfrog <br />over Roseville to the greenfields beyond where city assistance isn't <br />needed and it is easier to develop. Without substantial city assistance <br />nothing new will happen at Twin Lakes except possibly some <br />reinforcement of the current trucking uses there. <br /> <br />g. The ratio of public to private investment in Twin Lakes is still evolving. Yes, <br />the ratio of private to public investment is likely to be smaller in Twin Lakes <br />than other redevelopment projects (and it will be a higher ratio than some <br />projects). It is a smaller ratio because the Twin Lakes site is more difficult to <br />redevelop than most, as evidenced by the failure of Twin Lakes to redevelop <br />in a comprehensive way over the last 15 years. <br /> <br />h. The cost of redeveloping Twin Lakes will only become more expensive over <br />time. As current trucking uses get older and also possibly expand into newer <br />trucking-related ventures and structures, it becomes that much more difficult <br />and expensive to change those uses. The land and buildings don't get any less <br />expensive. The cost of environmental clean-up doesn't get any less <br />expensIve. <br /> <br />3. City Manager's Recommendations: Remember that compromise involves give- <br />and-take; you gain some things you want, you lose others. No one gains or loses <br />everything. In that spirit I recommend a Council motion or motions directing staff to <br />develop a Twin Lakes Financing Plan along the following lines: <br /> <br />a. Direct Staff to cease any further work on and to abandon Gap Strategies 7 <br />(City G.O. Bonds) and 10 (Fiscal Disparities Spread Citywide). <br /> <br />10 <br />