Loading...
2000-09-26 ~, ~ r AGENDA MOUND HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 6:30 P.M. .. _ _ _. 6:30 1. APPROVE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 13, 2000, MEETING. 2. STAFF REPORTS A. MEDIATION PROCEEDINGS 3. POST OFFICE A. APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH WILLETTE PROPERTIES 4. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION TO PREPARE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR DEMOLITION OF OLD MOUND TRUE VALUE BUILDING 5. DISCUSSION/ACTION ON EDC RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE CHANGE IN PLANS FOR PARK AND RIDE FACILITY 6. ADJOURN MOUND HRA MINUTES -SEPTEMBER 13, 2000 HRA MINUTES -REGULAR MEETING -SEPTEMBER 13, 2000 The Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Mound, Hennepin County, Minnesota, met on Tuesday, September 13, 2000, at 6:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers at 5341 Maywood Road, in said City. Those present: Chairperson Pat Meisel; HRA Board Members: Andrea Ahrens (6:45 p. m. arrival), Bob Brown, Mark Hanus, and Leah Weycker. Also in attendance were City Manager Kandis Hanson, Acting City Attorney Mack LeFever, City Clerk Fran Clark, Jim Presser of Ehlers & Associates, Finance Director Gino Businaro, HRA Executive Director Pinky Charon, and Recording Secretary Diana Mestad. Absent and excused: Tenant Representative Pauline Payne. Others present: Ken and Sally Custer, Gary Hart, Peter Meyer, Mike Huspek, Gerald Babb, Chester Yanik of Yanik Companies, Lowell Olson of Yanik Companies, Tom Rasmussen, Cal Korth, Betty Carlson, Tabatha Hanly, Nancy Hanly, Jennie Carlson Baltutis, and John Evans. Consent Agenda: All items listed under this Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Council member or citizen so request, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in normal sequence. Chairperson Meisel called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. 1.1 PHA PLAN PRESENTATION BY HRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PINKY CHARON. Chairperson Meisel opened the Public Hearing at 6:36 p. m. Chairperson Meisel closed the Public Hearing at 6:37 p. m. HRA Board Member Brown asked whether code for the American Disabilities Act had been followed. The HRA Director confirmed that it had. HRA Board Member Weycker questioned why the Tenant Representative was not present. The HRA Executive Director stated that she was unable to attend. MOTION by Hanus, seconded by Weycker to approve the PHA Plan as presented. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 40. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING. 1.2 APPROVE MINUTES OF August 22, 2000. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Weycker, to approve the Minutes of August 22, 2000. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 40. Mound HRA Minutes September 13. 2000 STAFF REPORTS 1.3 REDEVELOPMENT PROCEEDINGS. Jim Prosser of Ehlers & Associates gave a summary update and forecast for the redevelopment proceedings. He stated that it has been approximately one month since the Beard Group dropped out the process and in that time, five developers have been identified for the next step of soliciting a Preliminary Development Program. The five developers currently identified are: 1. CSM Corp 2. Ryan Companies 3. Gramercy Corp 4. Metro Plains 5. Beard Group (This developer continues to be interested. The initial plan submitted was an interpretation of the Mound Visions Plan and now a different interpretation will be submitted.) HRA Board Member Hanus asked Mr. Prosser to elaborate on a letter received from Beard Group. Mr. Prosser stated that the letter referred to materials the City had sent out to prospect developers and which the Beard Group had interpreted to mean that the City was not requiring as much public investment or would itself pay more of the redevelopment cost. Mr. Prosser stated that this interpretation was incorrect and that this letter simply conferred basic information on current assessments. The cost for Beard Group was less than the original because the first plan submitted by them had certain requirements and parcels of land that had to be obtained. Mr. Prosser further stated that all of the developers believe that the Mound Visions Concept is a good plan, but that each of them will interpret the plan differently. HRA Board Member Ahrens arrived at 6:45 p. m. Mr. Prosser stated that he was recommending that a market research person be hired to give their opinion on the plan and the marketplace. He wanted the HRA Board to also give some input as to what issues this person should look at. The City Manager stated that she felt it was important to discuss this and suggested that the October 10 HRA meeting allow one hour for this discussion to take place. She further suggested that the meeting start at 6:00 p. m. to allow for this discussion. Chairperson Meisel asked what the cost for the market research person would be. Mr. Prosser stated that he did not have an estimate of this cost yet, but guessed it would be under $2,000. He stated that the developers would be doing afull-blown market study. He stated that based on his experience, this is an expensive redevelopment project. L...w.~.,,., Mound HRA Minutes. September 13. 2000 Chairperson Meisel asked the Board for their opinions on this. HRA Board Member Brown stated that he was okay with doing the study, but felt that money was being spent here and there on the project. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Weycker to approve up to $2,000 to do a market research study. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 5- 0. Mr. Prosser stated that the next step in the redevelopment process is to meet with the developers and provide an orientation for the Mound Visions Plan concept and clarify the requirements. He stated that the City Manager has suggested there also be a meeting between the developers and a panel of business owners to talk about the expectations of the businesses. HRA Board Member Brown asked whether it was possible to put a clause in the contract that would allow a monetary penalty if the developer were to pull out of the process. HRA Boazd Member Hanus felt this type of a clause would chase the developers away and further suggested setting up shorter expandable periods of time. He pointed out that the developers aze spending their own money at this point and that should help to ensure their continued interest. Chairperson Meisel pointed out that the redevelopment process was not starting over at this point as much of the information obtained previously could be used again. HRA Boazd Member Weycker referred to the prior suggestion of asking a panel of business owners to meet with the potential developers and wondered how that panel would be chosen. Mr. Prosser stated that the Boazd could select two or three owners and that this would be a one time dialogue with the developers. He stated that it is impossible to accommodate every business in this type of redevelopment, but that keeping 1/4 to 1/3 of the businesses would be good. The City Manager stated that in order to facilitate choosing the business asked to participate, she would like the Boazd Members to submit candidates to her. Mayor Meisel asked what the time frame for this would be. The City Manager stated that she saw this as a two-hour meeting and Mr. Prosser stated it should be held in the next couple of weeks. HRA Board Member Ahrens confirmed that there had originally been nine interested developers and that had been pazed to the present list of five. Mr. Prosser confirmed this and stated that two of the developers (CSM and Ryan) are considered premier developers and that the other three have excellent reputations. HRA Board Member Brown stated that the two developers considered premier aze commercial developers first and residential second. ~.. ., Mound HRA Minutes. September 13. 2000 HRA Board Member Weycker stated that she did not want to limit who was on the panel of business owners and wondered if a broad selection of business types would be best. Mr. Prosser stated that this would not be the only opportunity for business owner input. 1.4 MEDIATION PROCEEDINGS The City Manager stated that there have been meetings with the business owners individually and as a group and some possible solutions have been identified. The group has defined the need for 67 parking spaces. There is a suggestion to capitalize on the undeveloped land in the area to provide additional spaces. Staff has meet with the two abutting property owners and one is willing to sell. The costs for this are currently being assembled by staff. A meeting is set for next week to present the findings to the property owners. HRA Board Member Hanus stated that the count of 67 spaces is the business owners' opinion and not what is required by code. 1.5 POST OFFICE A. PROGRESS REPORT AND TIME-LINES. Mr. Prosser outlined the current schedule as follows: Site and architectural plan completion September 30, 2000 Bidding October with late month bid opening Begin construction November 15, 2000 Move-in April 1, 2001 HRA Board Member Hanus stated that the greenway development in 2002 is not acceptable and wondered if there was anything Mound was doing to hold this project up. Mr. Prosser stated that he did not feel that Mound was impeding progress on this project, but that because this is not the standard Post Office design, it has taken longer. HRA Board Member Ahrens asked whether pushing the time-line up would allow completion in 2001. HRA Board Member Hanus stated that the greenway could not start before mid to later summer. HRA Board Member Ahrens inquired whether winter dredging was an option. HRA Board Member Brown stated he was in favor of doing a winter dredge. HRA Board Member Hanus pointed out that this would mean the winter of 2001/2002. Mound HRA Minutes. September 13. 2000 HRA Board Member Brown stated that he felt the project could be completed in 2001 with. the only possible delay being the placement of sod. HRA Board Member Ahrens stated that answers on the greenway would be available from Bruce Chamberlain and wondered if it would be possible to do the dredge in the spring before the spawning season. B. APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH UNITED PROPERTIES. Acting City Attorney LeFever stated that the proposed amount is close to the appraised amount. This involves payment of $171,000. Chairperson Meisel confirmed that the City would pay this amount and then be reimbursed by the Post Office. Mr. Prosser confirmed that this was the arrangement and stated that the HRA Board could expect a draft resolution for this at the next meeting. Chairperson Meisel asked what the time span was between the payment and the reimbursement. Mr. Prosser stated this would probably be 30 days. Gino Businaro, Finance Director, confirmed that cash flow would allow for this payment, but there would also be an urgency to get the reimbursement. MOTION, by Brown, seconded by Hanus to approve the settlement agreement with United Properties. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 5- 0. 1.6 ACTION ON HRA RESOLUTION REQUESTING 2001 HRA LEVY. The Finance Direction stated that a Council workshop had been held to look at the levies for the City. The Resolution was prepared by Staff as a follow up for this. Ahrens and Brown seconded the following resolution: RESOLUTION #00-20 RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE HRA TAX LEVY OF $53,000 FOR THE YEAR 2001 The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 1.7 IOSEPHINE LONGPRE REQUEST TO PURCHASE PROPERTY. Mr. Prosser stated that he has conducted preliminary discussions and made an inspection of the property. He stated that it makes sense to proceed with discussions at this time. He asked the HRA for a general idea of the direction to take and whether they would consider acquiring the property if it was reasonable. ~. ,. Mound HRA Minutes. September 13. 2000 Chairperson Meisel asked whether the building would be slated to go in the redevelopment. Mr. Prosser stated that it would. HRA Board Member Hanus stated that as long as the dollars made sense, he felt it would be good to go ahead on this. The Acting City Attorney stated that a motion was not necessary, but rather hearing what the general consensus of the Board is concerning this. Chairperson Meisel stated that the Board wanted to move forward. 1.8 KEN CUSTER REQUEST REGARDING REDEVELOPMENT. Mr. Prosser stated that Mr. Custer has submitted a preliminary concept that provides a number of opportunities including relocation space for displaced businesses. Mr. Ouster's concern is that he does not want to start spending money on redevelopment and then have the City take the property. He would like a grace period. Mr. Prosser stated that the project team is recommending the following response: 1. Authorize a 30-day "exclusive" during which time neither the HRA nor the City would exercise eminent domain powers to acquire the Ken Custer property. During this time the project team and Mr. Custer would develop atime-line development and review of a plan for the redevelopment of this site. 2. Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with Mr. Custer to continue the exclusive for a period of not to exceed one year, subject to completion of the development of the proposed site would not cause a significant hardship in the redevelopment of Auditors Road District. HRA Board Member Ahrens suggested negotiating an exclusive contract that could be renewable the same as for the developers. HRA Board Member Hanus stated that in this case the development is difficult because of the lot lines. A one-year deadline would tie up everyone. He further stated that he wanted to give Mr. Custer adequate time to explore this option, but did not want to create a hold up. Mr. Custer stated that he is very motivated to get this done. He has already done the soil and stability tests and also feels that the lot line issue can be addressed with an alley easement. Mr. Custer stated that he felt 30 days would allow him to find the answers to many outstanding questions. Mr. Prosser suggested setting deadlines at 30, 90, and 180 days. The City could then terminate the contract if the deadlines were not met. HRA Board Member Hanus stated that the success or failure of this proposal would be much more evident after 30 days. ~.~. , Mound HRA Minutes. September 13. 2000 The City Manager suggested that the agreement could set benchmarks tied to the deadlines. Mr. Prosser added that this could be structured so that noncompliance would allow the l3RA to terminate the agreement. HRA Board Member Weycker suggested moving forward with only the 30-day exclusion at this point. MOTION by Ahrens, seconded by Brown, to allow a 30-day exclusive for the Ken Custer property with benchmarks to be reviewed by the HRA. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 5-0. 1.5 REQUEST AUTFIORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH TRAFFIC STUDY FOR CSAH 15/CSAH 110 AND DOWNTOWN MOUND. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Weycker to approve the authorization. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 5-0. ADTOLTIZNMENT: MOTION by Brown, seconded by Weycker to adjourn the meeting at 7:45 p.m. The vote was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. 5-0. Kandis Hanson, City Manager Attest: City Clerk 3 Kennedy ~ Graven 470 Pillsbury Cenrcr 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 telephone (612) 337-9310 fax hrtp://www kennedy-graven.com ROQERTJ. LINDALL Attorney at Law Direct Dial (Gl2) 337-9219 'Certified Real Properly Law Specialist CONFIDENTIAL -ATTORNEY/CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMIJMCATION September 19, 2000 Jim Prosser Ehlers & Associates 3060 Centre Pointe Drive Roseville, MN 55113 VIA FACSIMILE AND U.S. MAIL Kandis Hanson City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364-1627 °' ~. Re: Mound Housing Redevelopment Authority v. JRW Properties, Inc., et al. Hennepin County District Court File No. CD-2594 Condemnation of Mound Post Office Relocation Site -Parcel 2 Dear Jim and Kandis: This will confirm that we have negotiated a tentative settlement between the Mound HRA and David W. Willette and Eleanor A. Willette, owners of Parcel 2 in the above matter. The property is a parcel of vacant land containing 16,200 square feet located on the north side of Lymvood Boulevard and west of Belmont Lane. The site is being acquired for the purpose of relocating the Mound Post Office. The HRA's appraiser, Cletus Liedl, concluded that the value of the property was $85,000, representing $5.25 per square foot. Pursuant to the appraisal report, we offered Willettes $8,000 for the property. They responded by offering to settle their claim for damages in the condemnation for $91,044 ($5.62 per square foot). We countered at $5.50 per square foot and they have accepted our offer, subject to HRA Board approval. This is equal to $89,100. Please submit the proposed settlement to the HRA Board of Commissioners for approval at its meeting of September 26`". We reconunend approval. We deposited $85,000 with the District Court Administrator with respect to this property on August ~; 25, 2000. The District Court accountant has paid the second half real estate taxes payable in 2000 with respect to the property in the anzount of $783.97. Willettes have requested that the settlement amount be paid directly to them (less amounts paid for taxes and special assessments). We have RJL-18G332v1 M U 195-2 'Certified by Minnesota State t3ar Associa[ion L„.._ . _. F. / ~ ~f K~ ~~ September 25, ?000 Ms. Kandis Hanson City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 ~-o~ STS Consultants, Ltd. ~~ ~.,r Solutions through Science & Engineering Re: Proposal for Phase II Environmental Site Assessment of the Lost Lake Dump in Mound, Minnesota; STS Proposa1610824PP Deaz Ms. Hanson: STS Consultants, Ltd. (STS) is pleased to submit a proposal for performing a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for the Lost Lake Dump. This proposal includes an estimate for preparing a Work Plan for review and approval by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (VIC) program and soil and groundwater sampling/analysis associated with the Phase II ESA. The following proposal provides details and cost estimates for the proposed scope of work. The possibility exists that costs for laboratory analysis can be paid through an MPCA brownfields program. Initial contact with MPCA staff regarding brownfields involvement is promising. STS is pleased to provide continuing environmental and geotechnical engineering services to the City of Mound. If you have any questions regarding this proposal, please feel free to contact us at 763/315-6300. Sincerely, STS CONSULTANTS, LTD. Gary J. R~lt un, PSS Senior Soil Scientist ~ ^' / /. ~~ ~~ -~ ~_ Robert L. DeGroot, PG PE Principal Engineer GJR/dn Encs. C6824001.DOC 10900 73rd Avenue North, Suite 150 . Maple Grove, MN 55369-5547. (763) 315-6300. (763) 315-1836 Fax ~ r Proposal for Phase II Environmental Site Assessment of the Lost Lake Dump in Mound, Minnesota 1.0 BACKGROUND Filling activities at the Lost Lake Dump occurred from approximately 1950 until the early 1970s. Waste materials were deposited over marsh land, organic soils. The waste materials included washings from concrete trucks, tree stumps and limbs from tornado damage in 1965, municipal solid waste and manufacturing wastes allegedly from the former Tonka Toys factory. The manufacturing wastes likely included solvents, paint sludges and degreasers. A former Metro filling station adjacent to the east side of the dump also impacted soil and groundwater in the area. Groundwater impacted with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) exists on the former Tonka Toys property (existing Balboa Business Center) north across Shoreline Drive from the Lost Lake Dump. A VOC impacted groundwater plume migrated southwest towards the Lost Lake Dump. Current information indicates that sewer utilities below Shoreline Drive intercepted the plume limiting its migration towards the Lost Lake Dump property. Based on current information, it appears that the plume has not significantly impacted groundwater below the Lost Lake Dump. This conclusion was based on a conversation with Mr. Paul Bulger, MPCA Project Hydrogeologist for the Balboa Business Center release site. A Phase II ESA performed by STS Consultants, Ltd. on property adjacent to the east side of the Lost Lake Dump indicated petroleum impacts to soil and groundwater from the former Metro filling station and impacts to soil and groundwater by non-petroleum compounds from soil in contact with apparent dump materials. The City of Mound should enter the Lost Lake Dump into the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (VIC) program. The MPCA VIC program, through the Land Recycling Act of 1992, allows entities that are not otherwise responsible for a contamination problem to be eligible for future liability protection when they ~ ~ Lost Lake Dump STS Proposal 610824PP 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK STS will prepaze a Work Plan for review and approval by the MPCA VIC program. The scope of work proposed in the Work Plan will be modeled on the scope of work described in this report. The MPCA may require modifications to the proposed scope of work prior to approval of the Work Plan. The proposed scope of work is based upon MPCA guidance documents and our experience with similaz projects. A site safety plan will be prepared for use by STS personnel performing the work. The site safety plan includes contingencies in case hazardous materials are encountered. The Phase II ESA is proposed to consist of six soil borings, four of which will be converted to monitoring wells. The soil borings will be drilled to a maximum depth of 20 feet or 5 feet below the groundwater surface, whichever is shallower. Soil samples will be screened for impacts by visual and olfactory means as well as a photoionization detection meter. Four soil samples will be selected for chemical analysis. The monitoring wells will be constructed of 2.0 inch diameter stainless steel screens with black iron riser pipes. The screens will be set to intersect the groundwater table. Protective covers will be placed over monitoring well above ground riser pipes. Two rounds of groundwater sampling will be required. The soil and groundwater samples will be analyzed in accordance with MPCA VIC requirements. -3- 1,. Lost Lake Dump STS Proposal 610824PP u 4.0 COST ESTIMATE The cost estimate presented below was prepared based on our current understanding of MPCA VIC program requirements. The cost estimate may need to be adjusted if MPCA VIC review of the Work Plan indicates modifications to the scope of work are required. If the scope of work is modified, STS will prepare a change order for approval by an authorized representative of the City of Mound. STS will not exceed the estimated cost of the project by more than 10% unless authorized by the City of Mound. Work plan preparation $ 1,000 - $ 1,200 Meeting coordination with MPCA $ 500 - $ 800 Drilling and monitoring well installations $ 5,000 - $ 6,000 Environmental soil and groundwater sampling $ 2,000 - $ 3,000 Laboratory analyses ~ $10,000 - $15,000 Report $ 3,500 - $ 5,000 Total Cost $22,000 - $31,000 The possibility exists that the costs for laboratory analysis can be paid through an MPCA brownfields program. STS and Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. have contacted the MPCA regarding this possibility. Initial MPCA response is encouraging. Please let us know if you would like to pursue brownfields involvement. Costs for the Phase II ESA could be reduced substantially by brownfields involvement. Total cost without brownfields Brownfields pays analytical costs Estimated cost with brownfields involvement $22,000 - $31,000 $10,000 - $15,000 $12,000 - $16,000 -5- ~ ~ Letter to Jim Prosser & Kandis Hanson September 19, 2000 ~''^~, Page 2 ~,J agreed to recommend approval of that atTangement in return for Willettes' assignment to the HRA of the funds previously deposited with the District Court. There were no assessments. Upon HRA Board approval, please arrange for issuance of a check payable as follows: Pa ee P ose Amount David W. Willette and Eleanor A. Willette Settlement amount of $89,1001ess $783.97 advanced for real estate taxes TOTAL: $88,316.03 Upon issuance of the check, please forward it to me for transmittal to Willettes' attorney in exchange for execution of a stipulation waiving further claims in the condemnation and assigning the deposit to the HR.A. I am enclosing a proposed stipulation of settlement for consideration by you. I am also ending it to the owner's attorney as it is similar to the form previously used with United Properties. Please let me know if you have any questions. Ve truly ours, ~.~. Robert J. Lindall RJL:peb cc: Gino Businaro Bruce Chamberlain John Dean Sherman Malkerson RJL-18G332v1 M U 195-2 ~,-...m.... ~ r 470 Pillsbury Cenccr - - , 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis MN 55402 ~' (612) 337-9300 telephone ! (612) 337-9310 fax C H A R T E R E D http://www kenncdy-graven.com ROl3ERT.T. L.1\l)ALI. Attorney at La~v Direct Dial (G12) 337-9219 'Cenilied Rcal Property Law Spccialist September 19, 2000 VIA FACSIMILE (612-338-8384) AND U.S. MAIL Karl J. Yeager Meagher & Geer PLLP 33 South Sixth Street Suite 4200 Minneapolis, MN 55402-3788 ~* Re: Mound HRA v. JRW Properties, Inc., et al. ~,;. " Hennepin County District Court File No. CD-2594 Parcel 2 - Willette Dear Mr. Yeager: Enclosed is a proposed form of Stipulation of Final Settlement in the above matter. Please review and comment. If you find the agreement to be in acceptable form, please make three additional originals, sign them, have your clients sign them and return all originals to me for consideration by the HRA Board of Commissioners and execution on behalf of the HRA. If you believe changes are required in the form of agreement, please fax your requested changes to me as soon as possible. Our objective is to have the signed agreement in the hands of the HRA before September 26 so the Board knows the agreement is acceptable to Willettes at the time they consider whether to approve it. I am advised that we should be able to get a check from the HRA within five business days following September 26 if approved on that date. R1L-186324v1 MU195-2 'Certified by Minnesota State Bar Association ~ ... ~ r Letter to Karl Yeager September 19, 2000 - ~'"""'r Page 2 of 2 The settlement amount of $89,100 will be reduced by the $783.97 paid in real estates taxes payable in 2000, so that the net amount to be paid to the Willettes will be $88,316.03. Very truly ours, Robert J. Lindall RJL:peb Enclosure cc: Sherman Malkerson Kandis Hanson Gino Businaro James Prosser Bruce Chamberlain John Dean RJL-I86324v1 M U 195-2 ~ ~ STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Case Type: Condemnation The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Mound, a public body corporate and politic under Minnesota law, Petitioner, vs. JRW Properties, Inc., a Minnesota corporation; United Properties Investment LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company; David W. Willette; Eleanor A. Willette; City of Mound; County of Hennepin; all other parties unknown having any right, title or interest in the premises herein, together with the unknown heirs or devisees, if any, of the parties that may be deceased, and including unknown spouses, if any, Respondents. Court File No. CD-2594 STIPULATION OF FINAL SETTLEMENT PARCEL 2 THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this day of September, 2000, by and between the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Mound, Petitioner herein, ("HRA") and David W. Willette and Eleanor A. Willette, Respondents herein ("OWNERS"). I. RECITALS 1.01. OWNERS are the owners in fee simple of the real estate identified as Parcel 2 in these proceedings and which is legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein ("Subject Property"). 1.02. HRA commenced the above-captioned proceeding to acquire the Subject Property. r RJL-186328vi 1 MU 195-2 ~ r 1.03. OWNERS and HRA have negotiated a final agreement concerning the total amount of damages to be paid by HRA to OWNERS due to the taking of the Subject Property. 1.04. l-IRA deposited its approved appraisal of value for the Subject Property in the amount of $85,000 ("Deposited Funds") with the District Court Administrator on August 25, 2000, thereby causing title and possession of the Subject Property to transfer to HRA effective as of that date. 1.05. From the Deposited Funds, the District Court Administrator paid the real estate taxes payable in 2000, which remained unpaid as of the Deposit in the amount of $783.97. There were no special assessments levied against the Subject Property which remained unpaid as of the date of the deposit. 1.06. The District Court herein has issued its Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order Appointing Commissioners and its Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order Authorizing Transfer of Title and Possession, which are both on file in the office of the District Court Administrator. II. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, their mutual promises and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto hereby agree as follows: 2.01. Incorporation of Recitals. The foregoing recitals are made a part of this Agreement. 2.02. Total Damages. HRA and OWNERS agree that HRA shall pay OWNERS total damages due to the taking of the Subject Property in the amount of $89,100, less the amount paid by the District Court Administrator for real estate taxes payable in 2000, for a settlement amount of RJL-186328v1 2 MU 195-2 L ,. 1= $88,316.03 ("Settlement Amount"). This Agreement is subject to approval by the Boazd of Commissioners of HRA. HRA shall pay OWNERS the Settlement Amount within five (5) business days following approval of the settlement by the HRA's Board of Commissioners. HRA shall pay OWNERS interest at the judgment rate on the Settlement Amount for each day elapsing between October 3, 2000 and the date of payment. 2.03. Waiver of Claims. In consideration for the payment by HRA of the Settlement Amount, OWNERS waive any and all claims they may have against HRA in connection with HRA's acquisition of the Subject Property, including but not limited to damages, interest, attorneys fees, appraisal fees, costs and disbursements, and relocation benefits to which OWNERS may otherwise be entitled or claim to be entitled. 2.04. Right to Further Proceedings. HRA and OWNERS hereby waive all further hearings, proceedings and appeals in this matter except as either may elect in order to enforce or carry out the provisions of this Agreement. 2.05. Assignment. Effective upon HRA's payment to them of the Settlement Amount, OWNERS hereby assign to HRA all right, title and interest which OWNERS have in the Deposited Funds and agree that HRA may obtain an order ex pane in the above captioned matter directing the District Court Administrator to pay the Deposited Funds to HRA (together with interest accrued thereon since the date of Deposit). RJL-186328v1 3 MU I95-2 c.,., , _ _ ~. ~ r OWNERS By: _ By: David W. Willette Eleanor A. Willette MEAGHER & GEER, PLLP THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MOUND By: Kandis Hanson, Executive Director KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED By: By: Karl J. Yeager 33 South Sixth Street Suite 4200 Minneapolis, MN 55402-3788 (612) 338-0661 ATTORNEYS FOR OWNERS Robert J. Lindall, #63277 470 Pillsbury Center 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612)337-9219 ATTORNEYS FOR THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MOUND STATE OF MINNESOTA ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN On this day of , 2000, before me, a Notary Public within for said County, personally appeared Kandis Hanson to me personally known, who being by me duly sworn, did say that she is the Executive Director of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the CITY OF MOUND, a public body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on its behalf. Notary Public RJL-186328v1 MU 195-2 4 ~.. STATE OF MINNESOTA ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this September, 2000, by David W. Willette and Eleanor A. Willette, husband and wife. RJL-186328v1 MU 195-2 day of Notary Public 5 ~~ ~ r EXHIBIT A Parcel 2 (PID No. 13-117-24-33-0085) (Abstract and Torrens as evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1001468) Street Address: Pending Legal Description of Property and Description of Taking: Taking in fee simple absolute. Lot 9, "Koehler's Addition to Mound" Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota, except the South 10 feet thereof and except the west 40 feet thereof. And Lots 10 and 11, "Koehler's Addition to Mound" Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota, except the South 10 feet thereof. This taking is subject to the reservation of minerals and mineral rights in the State of Minnesota. Name Nature of Interest David W. Willette and Eleanor A. Willette Fee owners Cit of Mound S ecial assessments Count of Henne in Real estate taxes All other parties unknown, together with unknown heirs or devisees ands ouses, if an Any right, title or interest in the Subject Pro ert R1L-ISSOOOvI MU 195-2 A-1 ~~. -.. Creative Solutions for Land Planning and Uesign Iloisington Koegler Group Inc. ©© ©~ MEMO September 15, 2000 To: Kandis Hanson, Mound City Manager From: Bruce Chamberlain, Mound Visions Coordinator Re: Downtown park & ride facility. As you know, the Mound Visions plan has suggested that a 50-car transit, park & ride facility could be located in the Elotel District adjacent to Lost Lake. As we have prepared the preliminary construction drawings and gotten further into our discussions with Hennepin County regarding design of the realigned County Road 15, a couple of issues have surfaced. 1. Bus access into the site: I Eennepin County will be constructing medians on the new roadway, which will disallow a si-nple bus pull-off loop. As a result, the bus would need to pull fully into the site and loop around the parking lot. Because of bus turning radii, the parking lot would consume a large amount of land for driving lanes and cause an inefficient parking lot. 2. Expansion capacity: For the same reasons mentioned above, the park & ride lot in the Hotel District would be difficult to expand if the need arose. Also, as we get closer to an actual hotel development on the site, it is becoming apparent that the park & ride lot could conflict with other development opportunities on the site. As a result, we suggest that tl~e City consider an alternate site for the park & ride lot that better addresses the needs of the facility and downtown redevelopment opportunities. A site that appears to work very well is the Bill Clark Oil area. It has always been planned as a municipal parking site. Bus access would be very convenient and efficient. There would be a safe pedestrian crossing of County Road 15 at Belmont Avenue. The surface parking lot would accommodate roughly SS stalls, which would be enough for the post office overflow, True Value District retail uses and the park & ride. Transit and retail have different peak parking hours so we can maximize the use and efficiency of the lot. And, the site is conducive to a parking ramp, whether it is built immediately or in the future. The primary disadvantage to -noving the park & ride lot is losing the relationship between the transit center and the Lost Lake docks. So, I believe if the City decides to move the facility, it will be important to re-strategize the boat/transit center linkage. All things considered, staff recommends that the EDC recommend to the Council that the park & ride lot be moved to the `T'rue Value District. I will be at the September 21 EDC meeting to review the issue. If you have any questions, please give me a call. IISERVERLIclivelMOUND199-241DOCSIjhns_pk2.doc 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, MN 55401 I'h (612) 338-0800 Fx (612) 338-6838