CC_Minutes_2007_0827 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

y .., ~~" B Page 1 of 2 Margaret Driscoll ~ (a ~ ~ ~ From: Mark Rancone [mrancone@roseprop.com] Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 3:44 PM To: *RVCouncil Subject: FW: Proposed Twin Lakes Moratorium From: Mark Rancone Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 3:37 PM To: 'Craig Klausing'; 'criag.klausing@ci.roseville.mn.us'; 'tammy.pust@ci.roseville.mn.us'; 'amy.ihlan@ci.roseville.mn.us'; 'dan.roe@ci.roseville.mn.us'; 'tom.kough@ci.roseville.mn.us' Cc: 'bill.malinen@ci.roseville.mn.us; 'mike.darrow@ci.roseville.mn.us' Subject: Proposed Twin Lakes Moratorium Mayor/Councilmembers: Among other issues relating to the Twin Lakes redevelopment area, we note that you have on tonight's Council Meeting agenda a discussion of an Interim Development Ordinance (Twin Lakes Moratorium) as put forth by Councilmember Ihlan. As a significant property owner of land parcels within the area, Roseville Properties, we are opposed to any further delay in our ability to redevelop our land. As your packet of information reminds you, there was a moratorium in place that specifically addressed points "a, b & c" of the "Potential Findings" points as recently as two years ago. While the specific project has been abandoned, there was significant public input -from the nine month Stakeholder's Panel to years of public comment from a variety of citizens -during the six years of development of our Twin Lakes project. What continues to be irritating is the continued call by Councilmember Ihlan as outlined in point"d", suggesting that the City request development proposals for land that they do not own. What would give a City that right? Ryan Companies had the ability to put together a master plan for the remaining redevelopment area for many years and did not. When two Roseville based companies, Roseville Properties and Rottlund Companies took the initiative, millions of their own dollars, and six years of development time -the timeframe it takes to assemble the number of parcels for a large plan such as Twin Lakes -the delays resulting from the flawed approval process of the City of Roseville -not the substance of the plan (see the Court of Appeals decision) rendered a viable mixed- use redevelopment unfeasible. At this point, there are two pending applications, along with the potential FBI building on the Dorso parcel (consistent with the use planned for in our Twin Lakes proposal, by the way). We have also been diligently pursuing options on our land, consistent with land uses allowed by the 2001 Comprehensive Plan that governs the area. Anew moratorium could jeopardize the feasibility of these projects and increase the burden of all existing landowners for another indefinite period. Unless the City proposes anear-term purchase of all the parcels at market prices, which would give the City the legal ability to "create an open market call for qualified master developers", or if the City is prepared to use its condemnation powers to acquire private property, the reality is that you may not have any choices other than to allow current landowners to pursue their individual opportunities. Roseville Properties would be a willing seller to the City or any other party at an acceptable market value if that buyer can provide a bonafide purchase offer in the next 60 days. Councilmember Ihlan's suggested moratorium is yet another example of her attempt to delay the redevelopment of the Twin Lakes area in any way that may benefit the City long term if it is not consistent with her personal vision for the area. At times, good governance for all requires compromise from personal agendas. It is time to move that area of Roseville, the City's gateway from the west, into tax producing land consistent with the realities of the 8/29/2007