Laserfiche WebLink
City Council Study Session — 07/19/04 <br />DRAFT Minutes - Page 18 <br />financial gap strategies. <br />Mr. Noonan first addressed Councilmember Ihlan's previous <br />question regarding the difference in property acquisition and <br />market value developer costs. Mr. Noonan noted that market <br />value was based on current property use, and that particular use <br />may not be in compliance with the proposed redevelopment use <br />{i.e., truck terminals versus Roseville's preferred use). <br />Mayor Klausing noted that some current use may be valued <br />higher than the proposed use; Mr. Noonan concurred. <br />Mr. Casserly noted that parcels were being purchased that <br />contained structures that were of no value for the proposed <br />development. Mr. Casserly noted that the current property <br />owner still needed to realize a sales price recognizing the market <br />value of the parcel, and the building on the property, even though <br />not usable in the new development. Mr. Casserly further noted <br />that this created a situation in which demolition of the existing <br />building needed to occur, and any underlying contamination <br />issues, over and above the cost of the purchase of the property. <br />Mr. Casserly stated that this situation (i.e. building cost, <br />demolition, possible asbestos contamination, removal of <br />footings, and possible removal of infrastructure that has no <br />functional re-use) all added up to value to the seller, but not to <br />the purchaser. <br />Councilmember Ihlan continued to express concern regarding the <br />value of what the City was incurring for the site acquisition. <br />Mr. Casserly and Mr. Johnson further detailed the need for the <br />purchaser to pay the seller the assessed building value, even if <br />the building had no future benefit to the developer and would <br />require demolition. <br />Mr. Noonan addressed the public policy issues before the City <br />Council as they consider the proposed redevelopment of the <br />Twin Lakes area and how they defined good public interest and <br />whether it had merit for the City's future. <br />Councilmember Ihlan sought clarification on how the City <br />