My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-25-1989 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1989
>
10-25-1989 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/26/2013 2:11:31 PM
Creation date
6/26/2013 2:09:14 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
69
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />October 12, 1989 <br />assistance, the City is picking up interest costs. The <br />Planner did not believe the project could be stretched <br />any more. <br />Krienke felt that the B -3 property was worth $5.00 per <br />square foot, and felt that this is what the County Road <br />C property owners should be able to get for their <br />property. Krienke estimated the value of the County <br />Road C lots at $50,000 each. <br />Boosalis pointed out that the front portion of the lots <br />would remain commercial, and there would be enough land <br />area remaining so that commercial development could <br />occur on these lots. Boosalis estimated the value of <br />B -3 property at between $3 and $4 per square foot. <br />Boosalis pointed out that the portion of the B -3 <br />property that is valuable is that portion in the front <br />along County Road C. Boosalis felt that the back <br />portion did not have the same value and only added to <br />the cost for a developer. <br />The City Planner pointed out that the City is proposing <br />to leave a depth of 215 feet of B -3 property along <br />County Road C. The Planner pointed out that retail <br />strip centers need frontage rather than depth. <br />Pierce pointed out that there are other possibilities <br />for development of the site other than retail. <br />The Planner agreed, but felt adequate depth was left so <br />that lots could be combined and developed commercially. <br />Krienke stated that commercial developments need <br />adequate parking area, and felt that the back portions <br />of these lots could be used for this purpose. Krienke <br />again stated that the County Road C property should be <br />commercial and a buffer use should occur on the <br />Steneroden property. <br />Pierce replied that that issue has already been <br />explored. <br />Krienke again expressed concern with the little return <br />the property owners will get from the sale of the back <br />portion of their lots as residential, when he believed <br />the property to be worth $5 per square foot. Krienke <br />felt that the development of the area should have a <br />higher density than single - family. <br />Page 15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.