Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
REDA Meeting <br /> Minutes—Tuesday,June 5,2017 <br /> Page 22 <br /> develop a plan that would work; and if that could be achieved here as well, she <br /> would be supportive. <br /> Regarding President Roe's suggested alternate motion, Member Laliberte <br /> spoke in support of that concurrent work; but expressed her preference for <br /> making it conditional upon award of MHFA dollars and verified maximum <br /> amount and term for a TIF district beyond verbal presentations. <br /> For clarification purposes, Attorney Ingram advised that the intent of this <br /> proposed resolution before the REDA for action tonight was not committing <br /> any funding whatsoever by the REDA and city, but simply said that the <br /> resolution supported the developer's application for tax credits. Ms. Ingram <br /> noted that the MHFA required a resolution of support and certain language <br /> now showing that in concept the REDA would support the developer's <br /> application. Ms. Ingram stated that she wanted to make it clear that there is no <br /> requirement under the language of this resolution that the REDA has to move <br /> forward, but would allow for a concurrent process. If the tonight's action is to <br /> deny the resolution, Ms. Ingram advised that this would essentially kill the <br /> project, opining that the developer was unlikely to move forward without those <br /> tax credits. <br /> At the request of President Roe, Ms. Ingram confirmed that the REDA could <br /> pass a motion separate from this proposed resolution describing the concurrent <br /> process beyond the resolution required for the developer to move forward in <br /> applying for tax credits. <br /> Member McGehee asked whether the REDA could attach strings to the <br /> resolution allowing the developer to seek additional funding, and requiring <br /> them to meet with the neighborhood and at some point provide for majority <br /> support of their project. Even though the developer had indicated their <br /> willingness to look into it, Member McGehee noted that they hadn't offered <br /> any options to do so. Since the primary concerns is one of density, Member <br /> McGehee questioned what would happen if the results were for a less dense <br /> version of the project or a different layout, and how that would impact funding <br /> applications already in place or pending. <br /> Attorney Ingram deferred to the developer for their response based on their <br /> experience in the past with similar situations. <br /> Executive Director Trudgeon advised that there would be impacts, since the <br /> developer and REDA were promoting the project with a certain configuration, <br /> with lower density dramatically affecting the economics and use of the <br /> proposed project. <br /> At the request of President Roe, Mr. Thelen advised that with all developments <br /> done to-date, they had held neighborhood meetings, clarifying that the project <br />