CCP 05-30-2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

" Memorandum, Lake Josephine East, LLC Page Two May 26, 2000 . Mr. Evertz and Mr. Rekuski then re-offered $5,491, almost twice the amount they had previously offered. However, the WesslundlRushenberg's never responded with a value indicating what they thought the property was worth. I invited them to obtain a number through any method they chose to counter the proposal of the developers. Mr. Evertz and Mr. Rekuski then asked us to appear before the City Council seeking further direction. The City Council directed that more time be allowed and to let negotiations between the two parties continue. Mr. Wesslund responded to the registered receipt mail, indicating that both Ms. Rushenberg and he felt that the amount of space was not being calculated accurately, because they feel that the existing public road extension of Shoreline Lane was not in the calculation. Mr. Wesslund also indicated that he thought it was appropriate that the value of the acquisition of the road reflect current market value of the property purchased by the developer. In other words, he wanted to see lakeshore lot prices for road acquisition. Ms. Rushenberg did not respond to initial attempts by RekuskilEvertz to deliver an offer. I then asked Mr. Rekuski to give me a copy of the letter that they had attempted to deliver, and staff put it in register receipted mail. Ms. Rushenberg did contact me during the week of May 8th; indicating that she had been out of town for approximately two (2) weeks, and had received the . register receipted mail. She indicated that she had not had a chance to review the offer, and did not know when or if she would respond to the offer. I have had no further telephone or written correspondence with Ms. Rushenberg regarding this offer. At this time, Mr. Evertz and Mr. Rekuski are requesting an appearance before the City Council for support and assistance with either condemnation for the property across the WesslundlRushenberg properties to allow them to meet the timeframe specified in the Development Agreement, or to consider the possible connection between the Wesslund/Rushenberg property all the way to the north boundary line of Shoreline Lane (across the Baclunan property). Financial Imuacts At this time, there are no financial impacts to the City. There are, however, financial impacts to the developer. If they do not meet the timeframe specified in the Development Agreement, they will lose two (2) potential developable properties immediately west of Lexington Avenue. They will still be out the escrowed amount of money to extend the road from the WesslundlRushenberg property for constructing a cul-de-sac on their property for access for two (2) lots. They will have to reconstruct the cul-de-sac, which is considered to be temporary, and then remove that portion of the cul-de-sac when the road is extended properly. e