Agenda - Council - 09/09/1996 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

It was suggested that all easements are not in place. This is accurate. We also have not closed on the property as a result. Included for your review are the easements for the parking and roadway. The roadway portion effectively has six different parties to the agreement. It is the roadway project which is a major factor behind the delay of this project. The ownership of the property was brought into question. The City continues to own the property. It was platted so as to have two parcels, one of which will provide for the old Town Hall. It has been contemplated by the development agreement that, during the construction period, we would transfer both parcels to the bank. The bank would complete the construction and transfer the Town Hall parcel back. The reason for this is insurance and liability during the construction process. Section 2.1.1 provides for this transfer. Article V provides for the insurance. Article IX provides for indemnification by the bank for its actions. It was asked if the developer was in default of the development agreement due to lack of start on the project. The agreement states an August I2, 1996 start date with a March 1, 1997 completion date. The City remedies in event of default include: 1) suspending our performance requirements under the agreement; 2) cancel the agreement; 3) withhold a Certificate of Occupancy; 4) take any other action permitted by law. In order to provide for the default, the City must provide 30 days written notice of such during which the developer has an opportunity to provide a remedy. The August 12 date was 'set as a reasonable expectation of a time before which construction should occur. It was not expected that the roadway easements negotiation would be this protracted. It was also not expected that there would be an objection filed by a nearby bank to the Bank Charter amendment required by the Commerce Department. Both of these actions are expected to be completed soon. Hence, it does not seem at this time that it would be reasonable to provide notice of default. Finally, I have been told by various parties that this bank received TIF assistance. This is not accurate. The development agreement was written as a TIF agreement in case the City declared this parcel as a TIF parcel in order to provide revenue to upgrade T.H. #47 and 142nd. As such, this bank was required to submit to requirements that no other non-TIF project has been required to submit to (such as the inability to f'fle a tax court appeal of tax value). The bank has not received any TIF assistance. The City has entered into several dozen development agreements over the past five years that are similar to this one in format. We attempt to keep them similar in order to keep the contract management time to a miaimum. Each of the 100 or so development agreements negotiated in the last five years is slightly different in that each project has its own unique circumstances. Within each development there are many players, each with many tasks which relate to each other. As a result, it is absolutely impossible to immediately recall each provision of each agreement. Certainly, however, we could not close on this property until ail exhibits to the agreement are in place (which is confu'med by the City Attorney). This development appears to be well on its way to completing each of those items Council Action: No Action Required. Reviewed by: City Administrator CC: 09/09/96 /jmt I I I I I i I I I I I I '1 I I I I