My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
HRA MINUTES 01252000
StAnthony
>
City Council
>
HRA Minutes
>
2000
>
HRA MINUTES 01252000
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/16/2015 10:40:54 AM
Creation date
12/16/2015 10:40:53 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Housing Redevelopment Authority
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
1/25/2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
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
Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting Minutes <br />January 25, 2000 <br />Page 2 <br />I planning prior to construction. The key to a successful development in a business area, Mr. Krier <br />2 stated, is to avoid any interruption of the businesses. In other words, the businesses in the <br />3 Shopping Center need to be involved in the development and scheduling; however, business <br />4 interruption must be limited. <br />5 Sparks questioned what was involved in obtaining the Huth property as depicted on the colored <br />6 plan attached to the meeting packets. Morrison clarified that the City is considering either a <br />7 partial purchase or a complete purchase of the parcel known as the Huth property, which is the <br />8 old bowling area. Currently, an appraisal is being performed and negotiations are ongoing. <br />9 Horst inquired about the depiction of a park and ride on the proposed plan. Cavanaugh re - <br />10 sponded that the particular route that the park and ride would serve might be eliminated by the <br />I I MTC. Mr. Krier suggested, on the other hand, that if the City offers a park and ride, the MTC <br />12 might reconsider the decision to eliminate the route. <br />13 In response to a question by Horst regarding funding for the Shopping Center redevelopment, <br />14 Morrison reviewed the funding that has been set aside and would be utilized for the redevelop - <br />5 ment. <br />16 In response to Cavanaugh's question regarding the implementation of BRW as the design firm <br />17 for the project, Mr. Krier stated that Public Works Director, Jay Hartman, Management Assistant <br />18 Kim -Moore Sykes, and himself had interviewed two candidates for design firms with respect to <br />19 the redevelopment project. His recommendation would be to obtain BRW. He clarified that <br />20 BRW was slightly more expensive, but has experience in the community and has a proven work <br />21 record. <br />22 Mr. Krier further explained that, although Tushie-Montgomery completed the concept plan, the <br />23 company was of the belief that there would be a conflict of interest if they were to proceed any <br />24 further with the project. Morrison clarified that BRW would be working strictly for the City, <br />25 whereas Tushie-Montgomery would have been working not only for the Shopping Center <br />26 owners, but for the City as well. Thus, the conflict of interest was created and Tushie- <br />27 Montgomery wisely withdrew. <br />28 Horst inquired if the Shopping Center owners would follow the same design plan as the City. <br />29 Mr. Krier responded that there is a Developers Agreement in effect wherein the owners agreed to <br />30 follow a specific plan. <br />31 Cavanaugh asked for clarification of the next step in the process. Momson explained that the <br />32 Council needs to (1) approve BRW as the design company in order to begin the design process; <br />103 (2) authorize Staff to begin negotiations; and (3) adopt a revised schedule. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.