Laserfiche WebLink
4 <br /> to be able to combine the excavation of contaminated soil , if <br /> necessary, with excavation for construction purposes , <br /> although META has no identified use for the property at' this <br /> time . He speculated that excavation of contaminated soil , if <br /> required, could not be done in the wintertime but would have <br /> to wait until spring 1990. Mayor Sundland expressed the hope <br /> that Mr. Tyson' s client would be able to make good use of the <br /> property in the future once the contamination problem was <br /> solved. <br /> Mr. Tyson next presented cost information regarding various <br /> parking lot surfaces which was requested by the Planning <br /> Commission. He informed the Council META had received bids <br /> for grading and gravel surfacing of $5, 400 and $7 , 300; <br /> grading and asphalt surfacing, $13 , 200 ; and asphalt surface <br /> only, $11 , 000. He noted that landscaping with timbers , which <br /> could be included with either a gravel or an asphalt surface , <br /> would cost $3 , 600. z. <br /> Mr . Tyson expressed the view that the hardship to his client <br /> is not primarily economic, but that META is more concerned <br /> with the fact that they own a contaminated piece of property <br /> and that the contamination must be dealt with before <br /> • permanent use can be made of that property. He stated that <br /> META recognizes Kenzington ' s need for more parking but does <br /> not feel that it would be responsible at this time to install <br /> a concrete or asphalt parking lot which would be perceived as <br /> a permanent parking facility. <br /> Council Member Marks asked Mr.. Tyson whether his client would <br /> be willing to pave the parking lot with concrete or asphalt <br /> at the end of the three-month time period. Mr . Tyson <br /> responded that he did not know at this time what his client ' s <br /> reaction would be and that he did not have the authority to <br /> commit them to a course of action. <br /> Council Member Makowske asked Mr . Tyson whether there was a <br /> difference between the parking requirements of unit owners <br /> and renters at Kenzington, and whether the parking problem <br /> would be alleviated once purchasers of units outnumbered <br /> renters of units . Mr. Tyson responded that alleviation of <br /> the parking problem would be a logical outcome of minimizing <br /> _the number of renters in favor of purchasers , and that META <br /> originally foresaw the building being occupied by purchasers <br /> rather than renters -and planned parking the accommodations <br /> accordingly. <br /> Council Member Marks commented that the timing of <br /> Kenzington' s opening unfortunately coincided with a soft <br /> • condominium market. Council Member Ranallo pointed out, and <br />