Laserfiche WebLink
t MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />DECEMBER 14, 1989 <br />The City Planner reported that each School District has <br />a first - right -of- refusal option on the other property. <br />Therefore, if #916 decided to sell, School District <br />#623 has the first - right -of- refusal, and the same is <br />true for #916 if District #623 decided to sell. <br />Herkenhoff asked the reason the property is being <br />divided. <br />The City Planner replied that the School District <br />wishes to sell the Capital View building to #916, but <br />wishes to retain a portion of the property and the <br />recreational facilities on that property. The Planner <br />pointed out that the City's previous concerns were that <br />a commercial user would purchase the property and the <br />use of recreational facilities at the site would be <br />lost to the City. However, as part of this sale there <br />will be a reasonable agreement in place to retain the <br />use of the recreational facilities. <br />Drabik asked when the parking will be upgraded. <br />The City Planner reported that when #916 requests to <br />occupy the building, his office will be doing a study <br />of the parking situation. <br />Herkenhoff asked if the property would remain <br />tax - exempt under this proposal. <br />The Planner replied that this was correct. <br />Herkenhoff stated that he had problems with the <br />long -range implications of the proposal. <br />The City Planner pointed out that the property will <br />remain zoned Public and could not be sold to a <br />commercial operation without an application for a <br />rezoning being submitted to the City and approved by <br />the City Council. The City still retains zoning <br />control over the property. The subdivision is being <br />requested to separate the deed holders of the property. <br />Herkenhoff asked if there was enough property being <br />Page 2 <br />