Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />MARCH 4, 1998 <br />Lendway felt the City had an obligation to relocate existing businesses. <br />Fahey stated that that obligation did not extend to a location on Rice <br />Street. The City Attorney indicated that the City was obligated to relocate <br />with a comparable location, but that did not mean the location had to be <br />within the redevelopment district. Once the City pays relocation fees, the <br />business itself will determine where it will go. <br />Vitale pointed out that in the case where a business needed a liquor <br />license, the City would have to relocate that business somewhere within <br />the City in order to ensure that the business retained its license. <br />Fahey stated that the Council will work hard on the issue of relocation. <br />However, this does not mean that Tierney's wil] be located in front of the <br />movie theater, but may be moved to a location north of Little Canada <br />Road. <br />Scalze felt that the City could not ~ive any assurances at this point. <br />Fahey indicated that the redevelopment project will not work with a lot of <br />little buildings. It is density that will make it work. Fahey pointed out <br />that the existing businesses will likely not own their own buildings, but <br />will lease, unless the developer is creative and condds the buildings. <br />Fahey stated that he is willing to make a commitment to work with the <br />existing businesses, pointing out that these businesses should not expect to <br />own their own building on their own pad. <br />The Council reviewed Item #8 in the development agreement. Morelan <br />stated that he was not sure that relocation within the redevelopment area <br />was realistic. <br />Lendway suggested that this provision be left in the development <br />agreement since it was a good goal. <br />Fahey pointed out that tne provision also addresses the issue of <br />interruption of business. Fahey stated that he would like to pursue other <br />theater developers and determine if a smaller theater was workable. <br />The City Administrator indicated that he is assuming that the developer <br />will object to Item #8 in the development a~reement. That item is in the <br />development agreement because from staff's recollection that is what the <br />Council has said all along. However, this provision begins to tie our <br />hands on making the redevelopment project work. <br />11 <br />