My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC MINUTES 09271983
StAnthony
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
1983
>
CC MINUTES 09271983
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2015 6:07:47 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 6:07:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
21
SP Folder Name
CC MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1983
SP Name
CC MINUTES 09271983
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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
„ <br /> -5- <br /> Commissioner Jones then indicated he had been very sorry not to have <br /> • been in town the night of . the last Commission meeting where he could <br /> have expressed his opposition to the revised plans for the Phase 1 <br /> structure proposed for the Kenzie Terrace Redevelopment Project which <br /> the Council took up next. He said he perceives that building would <br /> be .viewed by the public as the "centerpiece” for what is coming in the <br /> next two. phases and therefore, should be aesthetically pleasing and <br /> should fit into the existing neighborhood. He found neither criteria <br /> met with the new drawings for the proposed condominiums which proposed <br /> to provide enclosures for the additional parking spaces which he <br /> believed would make the building unattractive and the garages worthless <br /> because both wind and snow would blow through the open gridwork all <br /> winter long. Mr. Jones was not convinced the additional .parking levels <br /> could not be economically built four feet further into the ground so <br /> the upper garage- could be completely enclosed and not exposed to <br /> Minnesota winters . He believed more specific- figures should have been <br /> provided by the redevelopers to support their contention that building <br /> the garages underground would raise the unit cost from $7,500 to $9 ,000 . <br /> The Commissioner said he saw no sense in trying to save a few dollars <br /> and ending up with a product which would be. hard to sell and suggested <br /> a poll of prospective buyers be made to determine whether they might <br /> not be willing to pay a little more for garages which are heated and <br /> similar to those they had become accustomed to in the homes they were <br /> leaving. <br /> Steve Yurick of Arkell was present and indicated he was certainly in <br /> agreement with Commissioner Jones assumption that this building should <br /> • be the figurehead and. landmark for the rest of the project and said it <br /> is certainly the desire of his company to satisfy the desires of the <br /> people who would live there. He said just such a poll had been taken <br /> of prospective buyers who attended the focus meetings with the re- <br /> developers who had indicated that, of course they would have preferred <br /> heated garages , if they could have it for the same price, but, they <br /> would not be willing to pay more for those amenities . He indicated <br /> the elevation drawings had not done justice to what is actually planned <br /> with the revisions because the -enclosures would be built with ornate <br /> iron work which would be pleasing to the eye at the same time they <br /> would provide security those persons indicated would be essential. <br /> Their concerns about the security which could be .provided for patio <br /> areas would also be solved when those areas become balconies with the <br /> revised proposal, Mr. Yurick .said, and he indicated he perceived <br /> Mr. Jones ' concerns with the exterior appearance of the building would <br /> probably be satisfactorily addressed with the berming and landscaping <br /> which had not been shown on those elevation plans . <br /> In reference to the raise in unit cost for enclosing the parking areas , <br /> the developer said Kraus Anderson had based them on the difference <br /> between the costs of going up with two levels or constructing them <br /> underground. Mr. Yurick indicated he wasn' t denying that snow and <br /> rain might blow into the upper level of parking, but it had been the <br /> architect' s contention that this would not be detrimental enough to <br /> justify raising the unit price above the market for this area. He also <br /> • pointed out that, if the parking were constructed underground and . <br /> the building erected closer to the trailer park because of the boundary <br /> uncertainties, the first floor residents on the west would be looking <br /> directly into the trailer homes, just as they would if the project were <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.