Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Further discussion: Councilmember Elvig clarified that the motion does not include <br />renegotiations for additional space. Mayor Gamec asked when the lease will come up again. <br />City Attorney Goodrich replied in April 2008. Councilmember Jeffrey asked whose <br />responsibility it is for compliance with City Code. Community Development Director Trudgeon <br />replied the way the business currently operates is outdoor storage on an unimproved surface. <br />Staff has told the new tenant the storage needs to be put behind a fence or paved surface. Under <br />these terms the paved surface will be required within 6 months, so it would need to be done prior <br />to bituminous plants closing in October. Staff will work with the tenant in an attempt to get this <br />area cleaned up. City.Attorney Goodrich advised the lease requires the tenant to be law abiding <br />and comply with all the code requirements of the City. Councilmember Dehen noted under the <br />worst case scenario the lease will be renegotiated in April 2008. City Attorney Goodrich <br />indicated the amount of the lease will be renegotiated, but not the terms. Councilmember Dehen <br />questioned why the terms of the lease would not be renegotiated at the end of the lease period. <br />City Attorney Goodrich replied the tenant has five options, which continue all of the terms of the <br />lease except for the amount of rent. Councilmember Elvig stated no matter what happens on the <br />site he thinks this Council has said if the City is going to mandate clean up on Highway 10 they <br />have to start with the City. So, no matter what, this site will be cleaned up. He would hope the <br />tenant would work with the City on this. Councilmember Dehen asked if the City were to <br />initiate clean up on the property, if the funds used to clean up the site will be offset from the <br />rents received. City Attorney Goodrich replied yes, net proceeds are sent to the Metropolitan <br />Council. Community Development Director Trudgeon indicated if the price to clean up the <br />property is $10,000 there will not be revenue to carry that. Staff would like a better sense of the <br />financial picture before committing to anything. <br /> <br />Motion carried. V oting Yes: Mayor Gamec, Councilmembers Elvig, Olson, Dehen, Jeffrey, <br />Look, and Strommen. Voting No: None. <br /> <br />Case #6: <br /> <br />Consider Confirmation of Direction Given at Closed Meeting <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich reviewed that on June 5,2007, Council met in closed session to consider <br />various issues relating to the pending eminent domain litigation in Anoka County District Court <br />on the City of Ramsey vs. 5A Partnership I, et al. Before the Council tonight are two resolutions <br />for the 16 parcels, as one action was started a couple of days later. There have been a series of <br />actions with regard to this property. It appears at this time they will not be able to meet the court <br />mandated time period for the eminent domain proceedings. <br /> <br />Mr. Jim Lasher, LSA Design, stated in March 2006, the City Council authorized the preparation <br />and release ofRFP's for the Ramsey Crossings project. The Council ultimately selected to enter <br />into exclusive negotiations with Robert Muir Companies in June 2006, and Robert Muir <br />Companies was unable to come to an agreement with the City. Council then moved forward <br />with negotiations with Ryan Construction Company, who was also unable to move forward on <br />the project. Target Corporation was interested in being at the Ramsey Crossings site, and staff <br />initiated a term sheet with Target. In June, Target indicated they were not able to move forward. <br />Target was very positive about Ramsey, and said that ultimately they want to be located in <br />Ramsey, but not at this time due to the slowdown in development and housing at this time. <br /> <br />City Council / July 10,2007 <br />Page 15 of 24 <br />