Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />Mr. Bradley said the public benefit is not limited to the tenants of <br />a project, yet one as represented by the applicant is limited to the <br />tenants--the handicapped. The only argument he saw for public benefit <br />in the present application was the open pocket spaces. He wondered if <br />it might be feasible for Council to delay action on this application <br />for Joint Parks consideration of the public benefit and whether it could <br />be expanded in this area. He also felt there should be some control <br />procedures as to what constitutes public benefit. <br /> <br />Mr. Hamel noted one public benefit which has not been mentioned was the <br />fact that the tenants will be close enough to downtown that they will <br />not be driving their automobiles to and from, therefore relieving the <br />parking and traffic congestion. <br /> <br />Mayor Keller noted it was Council's 1990 Plan and Council has been <br />working to make the Westside area a more livable part of the City. He <br />said if Council has failed, it is only because they have never had a <br />fine definition of what is in the best interests of the public. He <br />said this particular development does meet a need in the City and it <br />would appear in the best interests of Council to approve the project. <br /> <br />C. B. 1590--Granting multiple unit property tax exemption for Diversified <br />Development Company for property located between 8th and <br />Broadway and Lawrence and Washington Streets was read by <br />council bill number and title only, there being no Council <br />member present requesting it be read in full. <br /> <br />~ Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Bradley, that the bill be read <br />the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous <br />consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this <br />time. <br /> <br />Mr. Lieuallen, Mr. Bradley, and Mr. Williams noted they would vote <br />reluctantly in favor of the first motion but would vote no on the second <br />motion. <br /> <br />Vote was taken on the motion which carried unanimously and the <br />bill was read the second time by,council bill number only. <br /> <br />Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Haws, that the bill be approved <br />and given final passage. Roll call vote. Motion carried with <br />Hamel, Haws, Smith, and Obie voting aye; Bradley, Lieuallen, and <br />Williams voting no. The bill was declared passed and numbered <br />18015. <br /> <br />It was consensus of Council that the public benefit definition would be <br />brought back for further discussion. Mr. Bradley felt it important to <br />have input from the other taxing districts in the area. Mr. Haws noted <br />that it should be included if there are units for the handicapped they <br />in fact be rented to handicapped people. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />1/18/78--9 <br /> <br />36 <br />