Laserfiche WebLink
Revitalization Commission <br />Minutes <br />July 7, 2021 <br />Page 3 of 4 <br />Manager Balser said that by the time bonds are issued, projects would be much <br />more advanced and Council will be able to make decisions based on priorities <br />and costs. Commissioner Tofte indicated he also prefers Option #1 to <br />incentivize City Council. <br />Commissioner Smith agreed with Commissioner Tofte and likes Option #1. He <br />noted his review of the financials shows even with conservative estimates, the <br />LRC still will have a lot of money to be spent by 2032. Chair Adler also said she <br />was most comfortable with Option #1 because it leaves room for future projects. <br />Commissioners iterated additional funds could be pledged toward the <br />underpass improvements in the future. <br />Commissioner Gorsevski likes all options but thinks Option #1 gives more <br />surety. He said there is a lot of work to be done on Hwy 42 and the LRC may <br />be able to partner with CDOT on Hwy 42. <br />Commissioner Tofte asked if anything would preclude future LRC contributions <br />toward enhancing more basic underpass designs. Director Pierce said the LRC <br />is not precluded from either allocating funds to such improvements in the <br />Cooperation Agreement or through a separate Agreement at a later date, when <br />there is more specificity about what is needed on the particular project. She <br />also described the LRC's right to review and approve significant project <br />changes, as outlined in the Cooperation Agreement. <br />Council member Leh said costs will be reduced as much as possible and that <br />there will be more public process for input. He said there are a number of <br />projects on the horizon that the LRC may be able to contribute to. He feels the <br />Comprehensive Plan update could result in substantial changes that may spur <br />more interest in LRC assistance. He supports Option #1. <br />Chair Adler confirmed she is in favor with Option #1 to show priorities and <br />leaving room for future projects. She likes the idea of being able to make future <br />contributions if needed. Commissioner Williams also expressed support for <br />Option #1. <br />Chair Adler asked for public comments. Mike Kranzdorf supports Option #1. He <br />said changes could arise and that Hwy 42 will present opportunities for LRC <br />expenditures. <br />Agenda Packet P. 17 <br />