|
<br /> r
<br /> (19'024
<br /> } h; h,; ;~ e
<br /> 6/23/69 -- .-.
<br /> i
<br /> was explained that the committee appointed at this meeting would set up procedures for collecting the I,
<br /> tax, and would in no way consider disbursement of funds.
<br /> I
<br /> , Myra Miller, 2123 Madison, asked about the composition of the proposed committee, and asked that
<br /> I
<br /> I
<br /> I consideration be given to placing young people on the committee.
<br /> I,
<br /> :1 Mr, Morven Thomas asked all those present to write to the appropriation committee in Washington, D.c.1
<br /> il
<br /> I
<br /> I, requesting that proposed cuts not be made in the housing budget, Mayor Anderson said a wire had been I
<br /> :'
<br /> ,\ sent from the Council to the Congress.
<br /> :I
<br /> "
<br /> :i A short recess was taken.
<br /> "
<br /> Ii
<br /> Ii Purdy wished to clarify that the intention of _the voters when they passed the room tax was that it
<br /> " Dr.
<br /> I'
<br /> Ii would be used for auditorium facilities in a !eserve fund for convention facilities, financing of
<br /> Ii
<br /> Ii convention related facilities, and tourist and tourist related facilities.
<br /> II
<br /> " I
<br /> "
<br /> I II
<br /> [i 3. Planning Commission Report, May 12, 1969 e
<br /> ii a. Zone Change Recommendation - Harold ' ~lson, northwest corner Coburg and Willakenzie
<br /> :1 II
<br /> I' from RA to R-2 and RP, pending Planned Unit Devclopment approval, before final passage
<br /> Ii
<br /> Ii of ord inan ce,
<br /> II The Council toured this site before the meeting. The Planning Director explained the
<br /> 'I
<br /> I, request and showed a map of the area, with surrounding zoning. He said the request I
<br /> I,
<br /> Ii conforms to the General plan for the area, He explained the restricted access, and that ii
<br /> Ii I
<br /> ,I they are striving to nave access to commercial areas from within the development.
<br /> II I
<br /> i,
<br /> I' Gribskov moved seconded by Mrs. Hayward to approve the recommendation of the I
<br /> , Mr.
<br /> II
<br /> [I Planning C?mmission for rezoning of the northwest corner of Coburg and Willakenzie from I
<br /> RA to R-2 and RP, subject to Plann~d Unit Devcl opment approval. Motion carr:i:ed.
<br /> II Ii
<br /> II
<br /> Ii Mrs. Hayward moved seconded by Mr. McDonald that Item 3a of the Committee report be approved. Motion
<br /> ,i carried.
<br /> I, II
<br /> It
<br /> I' , '''~~''_ . "" ----- -.' -'_.".i:- ''''''~.. " ,_ .
<br /> II O. "Contractua1'.Agreernc=n:t'Modific'ation, State Finance Co. - The Planning Commission recom-
<br /> :1 I,
<br /> 'I menaed approval 'of agreement ~odification.to permit State Finance Company to sell the II
<br /> :1
<br /> i' easterly portion of its property at Cal Young and Coburg Road to Safeway Stores. The
<br /> I
<br /> 'i recommendation is subject to development of the property under the Planned Unit Devel- :1
<br /> I'
<br /> I, opment ordinance.
<br /> 'I 11
<br /> Ii
<br /> :1 When the property was originally zoned an agreement was signed to enable retention of
<br /> !I I'
<br /> control of development. The Planning Commission believes the Planned Unit Development Ii
<br /> :1 II
<br /> il procedure will achieve the same purpose. It is recommended that the assessment of
<br /> $19,075.77 for the Coburg Road strip of property b'e assessed e-qually to each piece of "
<br /> II
<br /> property....., which would protect the City from foreclosure, if this was done by contract. II
<br /> The staff feels the most conservative thing to do would be to tie the entire Coburg II
<br /> R6ad assessment to the Safeway property, but this may not be desirable, as far as devel- 11
<br /> opment is concerned.
<br /> , Ii I
<br /> I'
<br /> ;: Mr. Edwin Jolley, a property owner in the area, was concerned about this development,
<br /> "
<br /> " since promises had been made previously, and the property had not been developed, but I'
<br /> " ,I
<br /> I,
<br /> " had been piled with debris, and had become a hazard to children in the neighborhood. Ii
<br /> ': Dr. Purdy moved seconded by Mrs. Hayward to approve agreement modification to permit Ii
<br /> State Finance to sell that portion to Safeway and that assessments be charged against II
<br /> that portion by contractual agreement, and that a clause be included in the agreement that!
<br /> they are obligated to clean the remaining portion of the property. If cleaning is not Ii
<br /> done, it will be done by the City at State Finance expense, subject to P.U.D. procedure. II e
<br /> ' I'
<br /> II
<br /> Mr. McDonald was concerned about the assessments and felt the entire amount should be II
<br /> assessed to the Safeway property. Dr. Purdy said his intent was that the staff would I
<br /> " work this ouL Ii
<br /> Councilman McDonald moved that the motion be amended to say that the full $19,000 J
<br /> 11 assessment be transferred to the 360' piece being sold to Safeway. Motion died for :1
<br /> 'I
<br /> lack of a second. II
<br /> :' I:
<br /> Mr. James Pearson, Planning Commission member, said he thought the sense of Dr. Purdy's II
<br /> ': motion was that the obligation of up-keep would relate only to the remaining portion. 'I
<br /> ,
<br /> ,I Ii
<br /> 1 It might be well to, include the entire tract, because development is rather speculative I'
<br /> at this point, and the neighbors would still have much the same problem. :1
<br /> I'
<br /> II
<br /> Dr. Purdy moved seconded by Mrs. Hayward to amend his motion so that the entire tract "
<br /> :: i! I
<br /> " q
<br /> would be cleaned up. Motion carried. I,
<br /> I Ii
<br /> ~ I]
<br /> " Vote taken on amended motion. Motion carried.
<br /> ,;
<br /> ,i I'
<br /> Mrs. Hayward moved seconded by Mr. McDonald to approve Item 3b of the Committee report. Motion carried!.
<br /> ,
<br /> ,
<br /> I
<br /> The Manager asked for clarification of the motion, if it indicated tha~'the $19,000 assessment was to I
<br /> I
<br /> be divided against both parcels. (Assessment against Safeway would be approximately $34,000 and I
<br /> against the balance approximately $56,999) and that the agreement would be modified to tie'to the I e
<br /> ,\ remaining portion of the property the assessment being transferred to it so that, should it become Ii
<br /> I'
<br /> "
<br /> II delinquent, the entire property could be considered security and could go through foreclosure pro- Ii
<br /> ~", -6/23/6{'- 6 "
<br /> :1
<br /> 'I
<br />
|