Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />NOVEMBER 23, 1994 <br />the development agreement. <br />Betty Miller, 91 Iona Lane, stated that she was not <br />thrilled about having commercial property in her <br />backyard. <br />Morelan thought that the initial rendering showed the <br />project up to Miller's backyard. Morelan pointed out, <br />however, that the Winter~s have indicated they have no <br />intentions of selling their property. <br />Pedersen pointed out that the Winter property is zoned <br />commercial. <br />Morelan pointed out that the City's ordinances require <br />screening of commercial property abutting residential. <br />The City Administrator also pointed out that a buffer <br />zone was established as part of the Lakeside Apartment <br />development. The developer is aware of this, but the <br />City does not have a map laying out the project, <br />therefore, does not know what would be proposed in <br />certain areas. A preliminary development agreement <br />will set the process and answer questions. The final <br />development agreement would set terms and conditions of <br />what would be built. <br />LaValle stated that it did not seem like the City was <br />getting any closer to anything. <br />Morelan felt that another two week extension should be <br />granted at this point. <br />Hanson pointed out that the City has no exclusive <br />agreement with the developer. The TIF District exists, <br />and the City would be willing to listen to other <br />developers. <br />LaValle reported that he was told the developer and <br />property owners had agreed on sale prices, and this <br />evening the property owners have reported that no <br />offers have been made for their properties. <br />Morelan pointed out that the City has no agreements <br />with the developer, and the Rice Street businesses <br />should operate business as usual. <br />Hanson pointed out that the development moratorium <br />14 <br />