Laserfiche WebLink
. This more detailed review will demonstrate the costs to the master <br />developer; a good developer will not enter into a development <br />agreement\contract without a time for due diligence. <br />. Assuming the Council still wishes to proceed with redevelopment, but <br />without this agreement, more speculative land inquiries will continue and <br />increase the price of the land, therefore making the project even more <br />difficult to achieve. <br />B. What could occur by deciding to let Twin Lakes develop based upon a non- <br />master planned uncoordinated market driven concept? <br />1. Re-Use and Redevelopment may occur sooner. <br />There are developersand speculators interested in the easily developed <br />individual parcels (with Fairview, County C, or Cleveland existing frontage) <br />for trucking sales, repair and terminals, warehouse, and restaurant uses <br />based on the existing industrial zoning. (Lodging would require a rezoning.) <br />For some proposals, building permits and site clean up are all that is required <br />for construction to begin. <br />2. End the Stakeholder Panel <br />• The stakeholder panel was enacted to provide input to the refinement (an <br />implementation plan) of the adopted master plan. Since there would be no <br />developer's implementation plan to review, would that end the <br />stakeholder process? (Approximately ��,�'� of the $77,000 contract has <br />been expended t o date.) I n addition, legal and financial consultant <br />services would be terminated. <br />3. Loss of federal funds -$500,000 <br />. EPA has indicated if there is no activity in Twin Lakes within 6 months that <br />these funds will be used elsewhere. <br />. I f not used, it is very unlikely that the City would ever be awarded these <br />��� funds again. <br />I f the funds are used, the repayment of the loan comes back to the City <br />without federal requirements, basicallyas money without red tape for the <br />City's use. <br />� <br />