HomeMy WebLinkAbout10D - Quick-Take Eminent Domain for 16320 Main Ave. Property
PRIO'"
~".
, \
'("\
?\
?\I
t'11J
\', ''\:!,,~ //
"'<"~INN~sO~ 1'>",,/
"'-~-.- -~--~
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA#:
PREPARED BY:
AGENDA ITEM:
DISCUSSION:
4646 Dakota Street S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
April 7, 2008 \
10 D " At'
Frank Boyles, City Manage~\
Consider Approval of a Reso ution Authorizing the Initiation of Quick-Take
Eminent Domain for the Former Minnesota Nails Building Located at f:S32. i
Main Avenue, Prior Lake. I ~~8
Introduction
The purpose of this agenda item is for the City Council to consider a resolution
initiating quick-take eminent domain proceedings for property located at 16328
Main Avenue S.E., Prior Lake.
Historv
In 2002, the City purchased the property at 16318 Main Avenue (commonly
referred to as the Joe's Pizza building).
In 2001, the City had also attempted to purchase the property next door to Joe's
Pizza at 16328 Main Avenue (vacant then as it is today, now commonly known
as MINNESOTA Nails building). The City Council was scheduled to approve the
purchase agreement to acquire the property, but before the Council meeting, the
realtor advised staff that the Seller had accepted another offer.
The City's intent in purchasing both properties (MINNESOTA Nails and Joe's
Pizza) and demolishing both was to remove blight as defined in Minnesota
Statutes Section 469.174, Subd. 10 and provide additional public parking. In the
near term, the two properties would provide surface parking. In the long term,
both properties would become part of the parking ramp/multi-use building
redevelopment of the area.
In 2004, the City commissioned Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates to
conduct a parking study. The study found that the City would need 400 to 600
additional parking stalls by 2025 to serve both existing and future needs. Since
receiving this study, we have taken numerous steps to increase downtown public
parking but we are nowhere near to adding the number of stalls the study calls
for.
If the Council were to decide not to purchase the Minnesota Nails property and
demolish Joe's Pizza, there exists a recorded Party Wall Agreement between the
two properties which provides that "should said party wall be damaged or
destroyed by the act, default or negligence of one of the parties thereto, said
party shall rebuild or repair said wall, and shall compensate the other party for
any damages to the party of said other party." Therefore, the Joe's Pizza
building cannot be demolished without exposing the City to some liability
because of the shared common wall between the two buildings.
Given the condition of the two buildings, the goals of the 2030 Vision and
www.cityofpriorlake.com
"Phone" 952:447:9805' F~2<9!)2.447'.4245
1
Strategic Plan for adding parking for Downtown, and recognizing the liability
created by proceeding with demolition of the Joe's Pizza building without
acquiring the MINNESOTA Nails property, we contacted the owner of the former
MINNESOTA Nails property (the other party to the party wall agreement) nearly
3~ years ago when they moved the MINNESOTA Nails business from Main
Avenue to South Lake Village.
The family who purchased the property is represented by Donnie Nguyen. I met
with Mr. Nguyen and an interpreter years ago. Through the interpreter I advised
Mr. Nguyen that the City was interested in buying the property and would do so
for the then appraised value. No progress was made at that meeting.
Mr. Nguyen moved to Texas to an address unknown to the City. The City
attempted to continue our conversations about purchasing the property through
Mr. Nguyen's sister who operated, in part, the MINNESOTA Nails business at its
new location at South Lake Village. We were told on numerous occasions that
Donnie represented the family and he was in Texas. We were not given contact
information.
As a further attempt to move negotiations forward, we began to contact Prior
Lake State Bank who holds the mortgage on the property. Our efforts were
unproductive for months until at the beginning of this year Bob Facente from
Prior Lake State Bank, contacted us indicating that Donnie would be coming
back to Prior Lake for a visit. Before he arrived, the City worked to have its six-
month old appraisal updated.
Current Circumstances
On February 28, 2008, Paul Snook, Kelly Meyer and I met with Bob Facente,
Donnie Nguyen, Trieu Pham and Loan Nguyen at the Prior Lake State Bank
offices. I advised the parties that the City was still interested in purchasing the
property for public parking and to eliminate blight pursuant to Minnesota Statutes
469.174, Subd. 10. I indicated that we had obtained an appraisal six months ago
reflecting a property value of $110,000 and had updated it in February 2008.
The appraisal identified the current value for the property of $112,000. We
provided a complete copy of the appraisal and a written offer letter for the
property for a purchase price of $112,000.
Mr. Nguyen indicated that they had put a great deal of investment into the
property and therefore the family would sell the property for $150,000. I advised
Mr. Nguyen that I did not have Council authority for that amount, and suggested
that we meet again. I further advised Mr. Nguyen that the property had not been
occupied for 3~ years, was not currently in a condition to serve as a business
property, and that the City desired to purchase the property, rather than use its
power of eminent domain, to address our public parking needs.
We next met on March 4, 2008. Ms. Meyer was unable to be present and Mr.
Facente joined us by speakerphone. During the conversation we reviewed the
issues about the parcel and building, including:
. It has been vacant for 3~ years.
. An inspection conducted by the Building Official indicated the building is
blighted pursuant to MS 469.174, Subd. 10.
M:\COLJi'JCIL\i\GENDA REPCRTS\2008\040808 MN Nails eminent domain.DOC
2
. The property is believed to have once been a gas station and the City could
be buying an unknown liability with respect to the costs of any potential soil
clean up of the site.
. The parcel's value based upon our updated appraisal is $112,000.
In hopes that we could expeditiously complete an arms length transaction, I
provided a letter offering $130,000 for the property (attached). After allowing Mr.
Facente and the owners to talk privately, we returned after 45 minutes and were
advised that the owners wanted to meet with Mr. Facente in person when he
returned to the area.
Since that time, in my follow up conversations with Mr. Facente, he has advised
me that his clients had not contacted him or returned his calls. Over the last few
weeks this situation has not changed.
Conclusion
I had hoped that the City could purchase the property on the open market
through an arms length transaction. I no longer believe that the City can
successfully purchase the property without resorting to eminent domain.
The City Council has two options at this point if it wishes to continue our efforts
to acquire the property:
1. Continue to attempt to contact Mr. Nguyen (who has returned to Texas and
been unresponsive) and attempt to negotiate a sale. I do not believe this
would be productive.
2. Initiate a gO-day quick-take eminent domain action that would call on the
Court to facilitate the transfer of ownership, and a three-person
condemnation board to establish a fair value for the property. The 90-day
quick-take process accelerates the process of the conventional eminent
domain action which is typically more complex and can take up to two years.
Both the traditional eminent domain process and the quick-take process
allow for the parties to continue negotiations. In a quick-take action, the City
cannot walk away from the proceeding once the Commissioners determine a
valuation.
The steps necessary for completing a 90-day quick-take include:
. City Council adopts a resolution authorizing the acquisition of the property by
the exercise of eminent domain.
. City offers to pay the cost of an appraisal for the Seller as required by law.
. The appraisal is completed.
. City escrows funds with the Court in an amount equivalent to the appraised
value determined by the appraiser for the City.
. Parties recommend three Condemnation Commissioners to the Court. If the
parties cannot agree on the Commissioners, the Condemnation Board is
appointed by the Court consisting of one representative selected by the
Seller, one representative selected by the City, and the third representative
selected by the Court.
. The Board meets and establishes a value for the property based on its
highest and best use.
. Upon a finding by the Court and 90 days after the passage of the resolution,
property ownership transfers to the City.
M:\COUi'JCIL\AGENDA REPORTS\200S\0408C8 MN Nails eminent domain. DOC
3
ISSUES:
. The City pays into the Court any balance due over and above the appraised
value previously deposited with the Court.
Eminent domain is not a process to initiate without considerable reflection. The
property has not been occupied for over 3~ years. Mr. Nguyen indicated that
they are doing well at their new location. He did, however, threaten to move back
into the old location if necessary. Although to move back in would require
additional repair costs. As of today, the property is not adding any commerce to
our downtown.
Condemnation Commissioners determine the Fair Market Value of property
based on its highest and best use. Under the law, the City may not use eminent
domain to acquire property unless the City has a valid "public purpose" for the
property. The City Attorney is satisfied that providing parking for the Downtown
business area is a valid "public purpose" and said finding is clearly set out in the
resolution authorizing eminent domain proceedings.
The Joe's Pizza property most likely cannot be demolished without affecting the
common wall. This property alone does not provide a redevelopable parcel, nor
would it add significant additional parking. Both properties need to be combined
to be effectively used for parking.
FINANCIAL
IMPACT:
Despite the fact that our appraisal reflects a value of $112,000 and the Scott
County Assessor's value of the property is $115,400, the requested price
continues to be $150,000 from the seller. Scott County has informed the City that
commercial/ industrial property valuations will increase an average of 24.3% in
Prior Lake. However, we are aware that the value of this property will actually be
reduced to $100,000. Given these conditions, eminent domain is a reasonable
tool to determine the real value of the property.
The City could pay additional costs as part of the eminent domain process. The
City will have to pay our own attorneys, and if the final value determined is more
than 25% above our last offer, we could be held responsible for the seller's
attorney fees. The City is also obligated under the process to pay for an
appraisal for the property owner. If the building was occupied by an operating
business, the City could also be responsible for relocation costs.
Ultimately, the City will incur additional costs for the redevelopment of these
sites, including hazardous materials inspection, demolition, inspection and
mitigation of any environmental cleanup that may be on the site, and
improvements.
The purchase costs for this property would be drawn from Account 603-49804-
510.
ALTERNATIVES: 1. Motion and Second to adopt a resolution initiating eminent domain for the
property located at 16328 Main Avenue, Prior Lake.
2. Take no action and provide staff with additional direction.
RECOMMENDED Alternative 1.
MOTION:
M:\COUNCIL\AGENDA REPORTS\2008\040808 MN Nails eminent domain DOC
4
4646 Dakota Street S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
RESOLUTION OS-xxx
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE USE OF EMINENT DOMAIN TO ACQUIRE PROPERTY IN
THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESS DISTRICT TO PROVIDE PARKING FACILITIES
Motion By:
Second By:
WHEREAS, In 2002, the City Council undertook a community-based strategic planning process that
resulted in the City's first "City of Prior Lake 2020 Vision and Strategic Plan," (now
2030 Vision and Strategic Plan). One of the speCific goals set out in the 2030 Vision
and Strategic Plan is to "construct new parking facilities as part of Downtown
redevelopment projects;" and
WHEREAS, In 2001, the City undertook and implemented a Streetscape Plan; between 2002 -
2005, the City supported a Fa~ade Improvement Program that leveraged $270,000 in
public funds to incent $2,400,000 in private fund investments in downtown building
renovations; in 2003, the City contracted with the McComb Group, Ltd. to study the
potential for development and redevelopment in the Downtown, the Downtown
Development Study is incorporated by reference herein; and in 2004, the City
contracted with Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates to prepare a Downtown
Parking Study; in 2008, the City will solicit proposals for the redevelopment of
additional properties in the Downtown area; and
WHEREAS, The Downtown Area Parking Study, incorporated by reference herein, was completed
in April 2004; and demonstrated a need for an additional 400-600 parking spaces in the
downtown area by the year 2025; and
WHEREAS, Whenever vacant and blighted property as defined in Minnesota Statutes 469.174,
Subd. 10 is available in the downtown, City staff assesses its suitability to support
redevelopment or as a potential location to meet the present and future need for
additional parking in the downtown; and
WHEREAS There is presently a blighted and vacant building located at 16328 Main Avenue in
downtown Prior Lake which is a suitable location for a municipal parking facility; and
WHEREAS The City has made two purchase offers in writing on February 28, 2008, and March 5,
2008, the first equal to the appraised value and the second exceeding the appraised
value, to acquire the property from its owner; and
WHEREAS The property owner has established a sale price substantially higher than the appraisal
value and has been unwilling to reduce the price; and
WHEREAS The City has attempted to negotiate in good faith with the owner and believes further
negotiations will not result in an acquisition of the property by sale.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF PRIOR LAKE,
MINNESOTA as follows:
M:\CQUNCIL\RESOLUTI\2008\040708 Eminent Domai~cMyi5$~@rlake.com
Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245
1. The recitals set forth above are incorporated herein.
2. Providing public parking to support downtown businesses is a public purpose.
3. Removal of blighted structures as defined by Minnesota Statutes 469.174, Subd. 10 is a public
purpose.
4. The City Attorney is authorized to use the City's power of "quick take" eminent domain to obtain the
property located at 16328 Main Avenue legally described as all that part of the South 102 feet of
Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, Cates Addition to Prior Lake, lying South of a line drawn from a point on the
West line of said Lot 2, distant 51.75 feet North of the Southwest corner of said Lot 2, Easterly to a
point on the East line of said Lot 1, distant 52.79 feet Northerly of the Southeast corner of said Lot
1; except all that part thereof lying Easterly of the following described line: Commencing at a point
14 feet West of the Southeast corner of Lot 1; thence running Northeasterly to the Northeast corner
of said Lot 1, Block 2, Cates Addition to Prior Lake, according to the United State Government
survey thereof and situate in Scott County, Minnesota.
5. Funds shall be drawn from account 603-49804-510.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS ih DAY OF APRIL 2008.
YES
NO
Haugen Hauaen
Erickson Erickson
Hedbera Hedbera
LeMair LeMair
Millar Millar
Frank Boyles, City Manager
M:ICOUNCILIRESOLUTI120081040708 Eminent Domain 16328 Main.DOC