File #: 21-16    Version: 1 Name:
Type: Administrative Business Status: Agenda Ready
File created: 1/22/2021 In control: City Council
On agenda: 2/1/2021 Final action: 2/1/2021
Title: 112th Avenue Project Update & Authorization of Amendment to Cost Share Agreement to Address Payment of Parking Lot Land Costs
Attachments: 1. Cost Sharing Agreement
Title
112th Avenue Project Update & Authorization of Amendment to Cost Share Agreement to Address Payment of Parking Lot Land Costs

Body
Request: The City Manager requests authorization to negotiate and execute an amendment to the Cost Share Agreement for 112th Avenue - Phase 1 with Reunion Metropolitan District to provide for the City's payment of the land cost for the golf course parking lot expansion in the amount of $143,800 from the project's remaining funds.

Background:
Pursuant to Resolution 2019-115 (November 4, 2019), the City Council approved a Cost Share Agreement between the City and the Reunion Metropolitan District (“Reunion”) to allow Reunion to design and construct improvements to 112th Avenue - Phase 1 (from Chambers Road to Parkside Drive) and to construct an expansion to the City’s golf course parking lot. The agreement established cost allocations and other obligations, including property acquisition. A copy of the Cost Share Agreement is attached in the packet.

The Cost Share Agreement allocates to the City all costs for the construction of the golf course parking lot expansion. The cost of property acquisition is not specifically identified as a cost allocated to the City. The agreement generally allocates the property acquisition to the parties based a description of land in an exhibit and assigns costs of such acquisition to the party designated. In Exhibit D, which defines obligations for property acquisition, the agreement labels the land needed for golf course parking lot expansion as a Reunion acquisition, among other properties. Reunion has indicated that, when the agreement was negotiated and executed, it understood that it would be acquiring the property due to its relationship with the developer and landowner but did not expect or understand that it would be responsible for the cost of the land for a city-operated parking facility to serve the city's golf course. Reunion asserts that allocation of the land cost for the parking...

Click here for full text