01/18/1977 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

in developing sheltered spaces as a visual improvement as well as ensuring the four older homes would be rehabilitated structures rather than being ~ destroyed. She continued that in light of the intent of the original State legislation, there was no question this project would be in compliance. Mr. Williams asked for an estimate of actual dollars to be forgiven by the tax exemption in this project. Russ Landress, P. O. Box 239, said he had no estimate, but was aware it would be fairly substantial. He said the developers were equating the tax exemption with the high price to be paid for the land and the amenities going into the project. The value of the average unit would be between $16-17,000 with an estimate of $1.7 million for the total project cost. Mr. Young said there was a necessity for a definition of what public benefits were to be. He said in view of the remarks made by Mr. Schwartz, the staff was not in opposition to including some design review element in the pre-application stage. However, he felt it would not be appli- cable for this particular project. He said the public benefits of this project would be in excess of $30,000 according to the cost estimates. However, the public benefits seemed to be appropriate to the area. He reiterated staff would be willing to require site review and design review. Mr. Lieuallen spoke in favor of the possibility of design review for interiors and exteriors, noting involvement of the architectural community as well as neighborhood groups who might be concerned. He expressed his feeling for the importance of the goal of providing housing in the down- town area, and said if it were made too difficult to build in that area then the housing would not materialize. However, he continued, the neigh- bors have to live with how the particular development looks and how it will function and how long it will last. He said it was not enough to simply provide housing, but Council should know what the particular development is going to look like. He commented the present developers for the project have projects at the Butte and at 15th and Olive, and he felt they were not attractive, and he questioned how long they would last. He was concerned that the particular neighborhood would have to watch the deterioration of the development over the years. He expressed a strong concern that the development has to be a place that is worth living in, if it is going to be compatible with the neighborhood over a long period of time. He fel tal aundromat was not enough of a public benefit, especially if the development is not attractive and may not last. e Mr. Williams agreed with much of what Mr. Lieual1en said. He felt when the city was spending $500,000, it was necessary to clearly know what it was buying, what the city is getting, and what it will cost. He said he did not know the value of the handicapped units or providing use of the laundromat as being real contributions to the public benefit. He said with the present pressure to develop land within the city limits, he felt development would be taking place without Council making a major contribution in making that happen. - 1/18/78--6 35