Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />i <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Councilmember 2~immerman suggested that the other requests for temporary buildings had existing <br />business buildings on the property and he feels this is different. He suggested that Mr. Johnson <br />should bring in ptiotos of what the temporary structure is proposed to look like. <br /> <br />Relating to some questions posed by Terry Hendriksen during citizen input, Mr. Johnson stated he <br />did not know wh~ they didn't have to post a financial guarantee, but that he would be happy to do <br />that if asked to do so. He stated he will build his buildings and the City will deed him the <br />property, not the i other way around. A draft of the parking lot will be available at City Hall <br />tomorrow. He thegn inquired what Mr. Hendriksen meant by cost shifting. <br /> <br />Terry Hendriksen; 15631 Ramsey Boulevard NW, Ramsey, stated that if he was in error on who <br />will own the prqperty, then he is even more concerned, because then Mr. Johnson will be <br />operating a business on City property. He stated he thought Mr. Johnson would own all the <br />property and then deed back to the City the Old Town Hall property. Mr. Hendriksen suggested <br />that each time weireview another area of the agreement, we find more concerns. With regard to <br />cost-shifting, he aompared it to "the fox guarding the hen house". There is no protection in the <br />agreement for the City; no construction managers, no financial guarantees like other developments <br />have had to place~'with the City, no protection for the City in terms of the Landmark State Bank <br />realizing a benefit lin which they are working full-time on the Old Town Hall and cutting a deal on <br />the bank building~ Landmark got a piece of property from the City that others would have been <br />willing to pay mo3e for and now they will be deciding how the citizens' money will be spent. <br /> <br />Mr. Johnson responded that he is not controlling the money along with the general contractor. He <br />did not hire the appraisal - the City did. It is not our intention to cut a deal and suggested that Mr. <br />Hendriksen is treading on soft ground. <br /> <br />Ms. Frolik noted that waiving the financial guarantee on site plan development permits has been <br />waived on numerous economic development projects for commercial development. <br /> <br />Case #5: <br /> <br />Ad,Opt Proposed Ordinance Vacating Drainage and Utility Easements <br />that were Dedicated with AEC Energy Park, Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, <br />Block 3 <br /> <br />City Administrator Schroeder reported that with the approval of the Vision-Ease Lens site plan and <br />the reconfiguring bf the easements dedicated within the AEC Energy Park, we need to vacate <br />easements because~of lot line reconfiguration. Currently AEC has dedicated the traditional 10 foot <br />wide easement around Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4, Block 3 of the Energy Park. The Vision-Ease building <br />is intended to cov6r all of the lots requiring that the City vacate the easements running along the <br />current lot lines, iThese easements will be rededicated with the new lot configuration with the <br />completion of the :Vision-ease project. Council introduced an ordinance on August 13, 1996, <br />vacating the drainage and utility easements. Such ordinance is now being presented for formal <br />adoption. <br /> <br />Motion by Coun¢ilmember Zimmerman and seconded by Councilmember Beyer to adopt <br />Ordinance g96-16 authorizing vacation of all drainage and utility easements contained within Lots <br />1, 2, 3, and 4, Block 3 AEC ENERGY PARK, Anoka County, Minnesota, according to the <br />recorded plat therebf. <br /> <br />Roll call vote was performed by the Recording Secretary: <br />Motion carried. <br /> <br />I Councilmember Beyer aye <br /> City Council/August 27, 1996 <br />i Page 11 of 17 <br /> <br /> <br />