2000-11-28MINUTI g TItI ItlL WOIIK§ItOP
TUESDA¥~ NOVEMBER 28~ 2000~ 5:00 P.M.
PRESENT AT MEETING: Mayer Pat Melsel; City Manager Kandis
Hanson; Council Members: Bob Brown, Mark Hanus, and Leah Weycker.
Bruce Chamberlain. Jim Prossor of Ehlers and Associates and City Attorney
John Dean. Recording Secretary Sue Schwalbe.
PUBLIC PRESENT: Pete Meyer, Kim Anderson
1. OPEN MEETING AT 5:30 P.M.
2. U.S. POST OFFICE RELOCATION STATUS
Mr. Presser first provided the HRA Council with a background summary,
the current status, the development timetable and some options so that the
HRA Council can review its concerns. Mr. Prossor has experience both as a
city manager and working with six or seven different cities with project
redevelopment management and explained how difficult it is to script how a
timetable will occur. There are many bureaucratic layers in dealing with the
Post Office, which means it is difficult to tie them down to a schedule. The
HRA Council does not have sovereign rights over the post office; therefore,
we must seek their cooperation to move ahead into the construction phase of
the project.
With that background in terms of what we are looking for right now, we are
looking to receive by the end of this week design submittals. That phase of
the project is on track. Approximately two (2) weeks after that final
documents should be received that would allow the City to proceed with the
review of the site plan.
On or about January 15,2001, the post office should issue the request to the
developers for the building.
They will be seeking developers to submit quotes and build the building.
They will then lease it back to the Post Office. United Properties is
interested in being the developer.
Land purchase. It will be approximately the end of January to complete the
Land Purchase Option Agreement between the City and the Post Office.
The post office has an option agreement. Then they can assign the property
to the developer.
The Post Office next needs to secure some building design standards/issues.
The Post Office may be looking for assistance from the City if they choose
to promote a special design. The City should first look at the rate of return
before making any investment. The value of the enhancements may not be
worth the financial assessments to the City of Mound. Bruce Chamberlain is
requesting the Post Office submit a "base building" quotation and an
"enhancement" quotation for the City to review.
February 2000 the Post Office will welcome development offers. In March
they will select a developer and agree upon a lease agreement. Construction
should then begin a month after the lease agreement. On or about June 1,
2001, the City should solicit the construction agreement.
Council Member Brown inquired as to the assurances that we have an
accurate schedule. Mr. Prossor suggested the HRA Council needs to review
the schedule in more detail with the Post Office. We can also encourage
them to implement liquidated damages (penalties) into their agreement with
their contractor so that the schedules will be met. We should stay in steady
contact with the Post Office and track every one of these schedule dates.
Mr. Chamberlain explained that in September the Post Office went back to
the concept stage and the schedule went "south". The City of Mound has
no real control on the progress of the schedule.
Council Member Hanus believes that this schedule is underscored by at least
six months, is totally unacceptable and filled with many conflicts. We are
now in a position that the City Council said was unacceptable eight months
ago. What do we need to do to get back on schedule which means building
prior to March 2001 ?
Mr. Chamberlain explained that construction on the Willette site cannot
begin until spring of 2001 due to weather, developer, etc. We also know that
the Post Office will not be ready until March of 2001. Council Member
Hanus put forth the idea of finding a temporary site for the Post Office so
that the Greenway Project will not be delayed. What about relocating at the
Dodd's site. This would promote the Post Office to move ahead with their
project. Mr. Prossor responded to keep in mind any relocation would have
to meet current code and this will easily cost over $100,000. The cost to
relocate at the Balboa site would be approximately $300,000.00.
Council Member Hanus inquired to as to opening bids in March 2001. How
long is there between bid opening and starting construction. Are there any
limitations as to loss of funds. Mr. Prossor stated there is no legal
limitations. Mr. Chamberlain suggested to promote payment based on a
percentage of completion.
Mr. Prossor suggested meeting with some developers to get feedback in
regards to scheduling. Construction time is approximately eight to nine
months. Also the DNR limits dredging to due to lack of sunlight to
spawning fish. There are no time restrictions on dredging the shore area.
Council Member Brown agrees with Hanus and that for two years this
program was supposedly going forward. We have continually spent money
and nothing is moving forward.
Council Member Hanus questioned if we can get a congressional Delegation
involved. Mr. Prossor explained that a Congressional Delegation has been
discussed. This is not likely to help the situation and only hurt. Also it is
very difficult to deal with the Post Office because they are not local they are
out of Kansas City. The Post Office is at the point where they have to do
something. They are very cramped in their present location.
Council Member Hanus questioned if the City can we give them a cut-off
date for financial assistance. It is possible that Mr. Chamberlain or a
representative could fly to Kansas City and get something done. Mr. Prossor
responded that possibly that would be an effective tactic later on; however, it
is too early at this time. The Post Office is in design review at this time.
Mr. Chamberlain furthered explained that the Post Office will review the
design on Friday and we need to have a discussion on "managing
expectations".
Mr. Chamberlain informed the Council that no sub-division is required and
the zoning is appropriate. A PUD and some variances will be needed.
Parking size variances will be required. The setback and curb-cut width
issues must be addressed. Mr. Prossor informed the Council that the plans
should be ready in mid-December to start the PUD.
requiring approval before they move ahead.
The Post Office is
Mr. Prossor would like to identify the earliest time we could have the
bids/specs prepared and lets get together with some developers to get some
time schedules and assistance. Council Member Brown suggested the City
Council should request from the Planning Commission a special meeting
date to move ahead to meet with this schedule. Council Member Weycker
asked about the qualification time for TIF? Mr. Dean responded that this is
not a problem. Construction time is five months for the standard design.
Council Member Hanus questioned if the land cost could increase a
percentage based on date. We should not loose any attempt to get damages
built into contract for lateness.
Council Member Hanus reiterated that the plans are just now being
completed. The City and Post Office can begin the review process as soon
as possible.
3. OTHER REDEVELOPMENT DISCUSSION
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 6:30. P.M.
Recording Secretary Sue Schwalbe