My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-25-1990 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1990
>
04-25-1990 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/10/2013 11:45:15 AM
Creation date
7/10/2013 11:41:43 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
153
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 />April 5, 1990 <br />talked about the area in vague terms, identifying the <br />mini - warehouse project and noting that the property is <br />zoned R -1 and is largely vacant. The Planner reported <br />that a few years ago the City did a Development <br />District Plan, and at that time the City considered the <br />possible use of the area as commercial and included the <br />potential for TIF use. However, the property was not <br />rezoned since the Council took the position that it <br />would respond to a development proposal for the site <br />when one was presented. <br />Garske asked about the impact the EMC proposal will <br />have on traffic on Edgerton or Rice Street. <br />The Planner pointed out that County Road B is <br />identified as a collector street, however, the City has <br />not been in contact with the County to determine their <br />plans for the street. <br />DeLonais asked the zoning in the area. <br />The Planner replied that the majority of the area is <br />zoned business or commercial. <br />The Administrator pointed out that there are some <br />single - family sites to the south, however, these are <br />non - conforming uses. <br />Drabik asked if the EMC request for TIF would be <br />feasible after the Legislative changes go into effect. <br />The Administrator reported that the City's bond counsel <br />has indicated that the project is doable even after the <br />Legislative changes go into effect, however, the safest <br />way to proceed would be to get the proposal into effect <br />prior to May 1st. <br />DeLonais asked if Gordie Howe had asked for TIF <br />assistance for his project. <br />The Administrator replied that he had not, but pointed <br />out that the Gordie Howe project was only at the <br />concept stage, there was no purchase agreement in place <br />on the property, and no assurances that the project <br />would proceed. <br />Esterbrooks reported that the single - family market in <br />the price range proposed by Mr. Howe was sketchy at <br />this time. Esterbrooks pointed out that he did not <br />know what Mr. Howe's plans were for infrastructure, <br />however, <br />Page 11 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.