Laserfiche WebLink
MINtITES <br />C~i.ty Council <br />Apri.l 27, 19t33 <br />Bond Sale <br />(Cont<) <br />Nor.th <br />Suburban <br />Corporation <br />Pr.oposal <br />Agenda <br />Item No. 5 <br />Mr. Flrad Parnham reported that i.n checlci.ng over. the three bids, i.t <br />was his recommendation that the bid of. I3anlc DIorT.hwest be accepted. <br />~1rs. Scalze i.ntroduced the f.ollow:in{.; resolution and moved its adopCiono <br />RPSOLiJTION N0. 83-4-167 - APPROVING 'PHE <br />BOND~.LE OP $1,480,000 GTNFRAL OBLIGA'LION <br />IMPROV~NI~NT BONDS OF 19£33 TO BANIZ NORTHTdFST <br />The Eoregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mr. Hanson. <br />Ayes (5) Scal.ze, Hanson, Fahey, Nardi.ni., Porsberg. <br />nayes (0). <br />Resolution declared adopted. <br />This resoluti.on appears in Resol.ut:ion I3oolc No. 9, Pages 179 thru 1£33. <br />Mr. I-tanson opened the publi_c hearing on the proposal submitted Uy <br />the North Suburban Corporation. F(anson read the mailing li.st to <br />determine those i.nterested parties in attendance at the meeting. <br />Mr. John Dobney, representing North Suburban CorporaCi.on, and Mr. <br />RichaxelSchri.er of the North SuUurban Corporation appeared before <br />the Council. <br />Mr. Dobney reported that the proposal before the CounciJ. ton~ight <br />is f.or a realigning ot the zoning of the property involved. 'Lhe <br />realip,nment would noC increase the density that would be allowed <br />on the site under the current zoning. A1so, Che North Suburban <br />Corporation i.s only seelcinP concept approval f.or their project at <br />this point. <br />Mr. Uobney explained the reali~nment of the <br />reported that the triangular pi.ece of. prope <br />in this site i.n the past has been sold on a <br />North Suburban Corporati.on and is no lon~;er <br />Mr. rahe,y asked i.f this pi.ece of. triangular <br />Dobney reported that it was. <br />zonin~;. Dobney aLso <br />rty that was invo7.ved <br />contract-for-deed by <br />a part of the proposal. <br />propert:y was zoned R-3. <br />Mrs. Scal.ze commented that she sti.ll had a quest~ion i_n her m9.nd as <br />to how many units Mr. Schri.er was allowed to develop on the site. <br />Mr, Pahey stated that he did not cvant to see any more apartments i.n <br />tYie City. i(r. Fahey stated that he was not anreeable t:o upzoninp, <br />K-1 property so that quads could be bui.lt. Fahey sCated Chat he <br />did not see anything in the proposal that was atT.racti.ve to the <br />city. Pahey also pointed out the i.ncreased traffic that 172 addi.ti.onal <br />housing units woul.d cause on County Road C. <br />Mr. Dobney poi.nted out that under the present 2oning, Mr. Schrier <br />could take out a Uuilding permit for more apartments than what is <br />being proposect. Dobney statect Y.hat if: the City downzones the property, <br />Pap,e -3- <br />