Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Page 2 of 4 <br />Memorandum to City Council <br />Proposed Agreement <br /> <br />Budget <br /> <br />It is recognized that sincc thc City has taken the lead in contacts with the <br />environmental regulators, Army, GSA, etc. amendments to the original budgct should <br />OCCllr. Staff has proposed (although not finalized in agreement by CRR) a budget <br />extending over the next two years. Major cost increases include additional staff time, <br />reflection of using Mike Comodeca (Spencer Fane) to a much greater extent for both <br />govcrnment relations and the environmental review of documents, and preparation by <br />another legal finn of the DDA. The budget would also be written that some minor budget <br />transfers, between line amendments, could occur administratively. <br />A larger issuer to be negotiated is the reimbursement back to the developer if the <br />Agreement is terminated. In the existing Interim Agreement, Section 6.0C rcferencing <br />Section 8.0(B)(I), it states that if the City terminates the Agreement based on... "Actions <br />or circumstances which would expose the City to unacceptable environmental <br />remediation risks"... and the City in turn selects another developer, within three years of <br />termination of the Agreement, the City will reimburse CRR for planning and engineering <br />costs. The proposal at hand is to extend this list and to have some of the legal costs <br />ineluded in this list. The rationale for this request, by the developer, is that there is on- <br />going value to the City for some of the legal work perfonned (development agreement, <br />real estate documents, FOSET process, etc.). In addition, CRR desires to expand this list <br />to include not only the environmental remediation risks but other event factors, such as <br />failure to agree on land use, etc that would cause the City to reimburse CRR. Included <br />with this memorandum is a proposed budget (not agreed to by the developer) that <br />illustrates the concept of additional reimbursement for legal costs. Staff recommends the <br />overall concept that some portion onhe legal should be included but the specifics need to <br />be ncgotiated as to what portion. The issue of the particular type of events triggering thc <br />reimbursement remains open. <br /> <br />Roles and Responsibilities <br /> <br />Since the day to day obligations have shifted to the City a new Agreement will <br />have to reflect a change in roles and responsibilities. The major change is in Section 4.0 <br />(A) which assumes the developer is the prime coordinator for the project. This "lead" role <br />has already been discussed and agreed to that the City will, and has, taken ovcr this <br />responsibility. At this time, there does not appear to be any major issues associated with <br />this item. Staff recommends the concept of revising the roles. <br /> <br />Exclusivity <br /> <br />In proposed Agreement #10 language was added regarding Master Development <br />Status-- Section 4.0 D. (I) Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA). This <br />language is sti]] being proposed with the exception of modifying the phrase ".. .the City <br />shall grant Developer the exclusive rights to develop the AH Reuse Area, subiect to the <br />terms and conditions of the DDA". Instead, the new language would read... "The City <br />shall grant Developer the exclusive rights to develop the AH Reuse Area, subiect to <br />