Laserfiche WebLink
REDA Meeting <br /> Minutes—Monday,July 15,2019 <br /> Page 5 <br /> developable lots and unfortunately why park dedication is not triggered in this <br /> situation. She noted staff has been talking with Parks and Recreation staff <br /> about this and will do more work collaboratively moving forward on how to <br /> create a better scenario in the future for a similar project like this. <br /> Member Etten noted as things are being redeveloped rather than creating new, <br /> if there ever was a need or reason for park dedication it is here with hundreds <br /> of units of housing with people needing green space and access to transit. He <br /> indicated there is a reason for that park dedication fee and it is creating assets <br /> for the community and for people of that community when buying or renting in <br /> the development. <br /> Mr. Trudgeon indicated as a follow-up on the comment, it is staff s <br /> understanding that the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul have special <br /> exemptions by the Legislature to charge for redevelopment. It would seem one <br /> possible path would be to get legislation to allow for the City of Roseville to <br /> charge for redevelopment. <br /> President Roe noted there is also the $1.8 million for the amenity that can serve <br /> this similar purpose. He thought that was part of the intention for adding that <br /> to the project. <br /> Member Etten concurred but indicated that was a random possibility versus a <br /> program in place in the City of Roseville process that guarantees what people <br /> need. <br /> Member Laliberte appreciated the developer indicating the willingness to work <br /> with the City of Roseville on this if that goes forward. She wondered what the <br /> timing would be of that by the Watershed District. <br /> Ms. Gundlach explained staff received an email from the Watershed District <br /> and it indicated the advancement of this to their board. Staff needs to get back <br /> to the Watershed District with a timeline and she intended to follow up with <br /> Public Works Director, Marc Culver, depending on what the EDA's decision <br /> was on that specific amenity because that is going to be a tough one and it <br /> needs to move as quickly as possible to understand what he timelines are. She <br /> did not have a definitive answer for the EDA, but staff will work quickly on <br /> developing it. <br /> Member Laliberte thought that while this is a lot of units of housing, she did <br /> not see it as plopped in the middle of industrial at this point. She thought this <br /> proposal really takes it out of industrial and puts people near amenities, which <br /> is what the city's goals were in the CM District and because there is abutting <br /> retail already in existence. She thought that was what people were looking for, <br /> to get out of their houses and yard maintenance and still have space and <br /> walkability to services and amenities. <br />