04-10-85 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

i"fIIQI,ITI? i Cit:y Couna~il Anr~i1 10, 19Ei5 L~rry Lee Mr. I.~ee poineed out Chat he has paid hi.s parl< charpes on hi.> Park Charges industria7. property. Al.so, the partc cliarPe on the res:identi.al (Cont.) property was or~ig:inally 5^,,150 per un~i.k and at: the end of. Che three ycars the char~e would :i.ncrease to $3 00 per uni.t if. Che property was not developed. I.ee did not feel thaC meant that; he had to pay thn char~;e at the end of. three y ears, just t:haC it woul.d be incre~sed :[f the property was no t dev eloped. Mr. Lee stated thaT. he had a probl.em with pay~.i.ng the parl~ charge on Chi.s propert_y before it was developed. Mrs. Scalze st:ated thtit the °arlc Coinmission f.el.t that f4r. Lee miflht not devel.op this proqert:y for a I.ong ti.me and that thei.r i.nCent was thmt the money be ~aid aC the end ot three years. Mrs. Scalze stated th~t. she tiould tflke the matter bacl.c to the 7?ark Commis,~i_on and see i.f Chi.s was Lhei.r undeestandi.ng of the macCer. .~'ir. Fahey aslced cahaY, saas done in the ca~se of the Schr~i.er devel.opment, The City Cl.erk rePl.i.ed that the Ci.ty co7.lected the ~arlc charge f.rom Schrzer already. tQr. I,ee j>o~i.nted out that there i.s onl.y a~r~li.minary design of the property and the plat has not: bee.n f:i.led. t~!r. Pahey suQgested t:haC the City Clerk coutd research the tapes of the meetinos to deY.ermi.ne the :i.ntent. Nir. 1,ee reported that he has submitYed a clrawi.ng for Phsse II oE hi.s project on South Owasso. ~Ir.. Fahey sug,~;ested that he appr.oach the Planni.np Comm~i.ssi_on for preti.mi.nary plat approval. Lee reported ChaC dependi.ng upon the indusT.rial revenue bonds that. he aets, he wi.11 eiCher bui.ld ttiao Large buildings as were ori.ginally presented, or 4 sma7.ler bt.~itdi.ngs. Mrs.N,:ardi.ni. st.ated that: she was more i.nterested :i.n the f:i.rst developmenC Chat was submit:t:ed than t}ie second onc~~< htr. Pah~y comment:ed that he cli.d not see the impact: between the tcao proposals< ?x(r. I~ee stated that: tite second proposal would not generaCe as much i.n Caxes as the fi.rst proposal. 'Che dl.fference would probab7.y be about a30,000 per year. Mrs, Nardini astced :if there would be a si~niF:i.cant d:i.tl:erence i.n numbers of empl.oyees. i~Ir. Lee repli.ed that that would dePend on wkiet:hec the bus:inesses caere mariiifacCUring or warmhousi.ng. Kin~sbury Dal.e K~ingsbury appeared before the Council re.gard~ing a drai.nage problem Drai.nage on h:is property. ~1r. Kinp,sbury asked i.L the Engineer h2s loolced at the drainaQe oE the aree. Age.nda Item ~o. 9 Page -7-