Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Council Meeting Minutes <br />March 8, 1988 <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />In response to Williamsfs inquiry, Locke indicated the development <br />agreement specifies the conditions must be met by June, 1988. <br /> <br />Benke asked if the plans need to be approved and the project ready <br />for construction; O'Meara responded it means the satisfaction of <br />the set of conditions be met (50,000 square feet, financing for <br />the Letter of Credit, and certain other conditions). <br /> <br />In response to Benke's question, Locke indicated that part of this <br />project's uniqueness is the fact that it does create, in essence, <br />an industrial park with lots that could be developed either by <br />Brighton Park, Inc. or some other party, and is confident the pro- <br />ject is doable (market studies show "build to suit" sites are in <br />demand). <br /> <br />Benke recalled, in her Old Highway <br />Lukerman indicated 50,000 square feet <br />should strive for and he then indicated <br />more ambitious. <br /> <br />8 follow-up review, Barb <br />per year is what the city <br />this project is a little <br /> <br />Locke stated the 50,000 square feet Lukerman was referring to was <br />primarily office/warehouse development; this project is being tar- <br />geted to a little broader use than that so there is more potential <br />there but it1s also a very volatile kind of situation. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Benke asked for confirmation that this site could accommodate <br />100,000 square feet; Locke responded affirmatively. <br /> <br />Benke asked if the city's marketing strategy could be pointed and <br />directed to support this activity in addition to other projects; <br />Locke indicated this would become a focal point. <br /> <br />James Senden, representing the Brighton Park, Inc. owners group, <br />stated they are looking for council approval of one clarification <br />of the Article V Agreement; believes there was a misunderstanding <br />with regard to the developer's intent on how it would proceed and <br />the City's understanding of it; it has always been their intent to <br />provide the $600,000 Letter of Credit (that money is in the bank <br />and the letter is being written); they replaced the Letter of Cre- <br />dit when the land was purchased (agreed to pay $600,000 cash for <br />the land the city would give them a warranty deed); and the devel- <br />oper needs to carry the property until buyers are found for the <br />last two lots, which is the purpose for the mortgage. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />When the disagreement developed, Senden agreed Brighton Park, Inc. <br />would compromise and make an effort to write additional safeguards <br />not only into the document but also in the mortgage document; they <br />now pledge 100% of the proceeds of the land sales will be put into <br />an escrow account to be used only for payment to the city for the <br />lots they sell and for public improvements; no proceeds will be <br />drawn until the project is completed. The document has not been <br />drafted. Regarding the mortgage, if the city pays off the mort- <br />gage, it will have the land back and that can be specifically <br />written into the mortgage agreement. If Brighton Park, Inc. <br />defaults in any way, the city would have $600,000 and all money <br />from sales of land plus and would have to payoff the mortgage <br />(which would not be more than $425,000). <br /> <br />Page 22 <br />