Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Council Meeting Minutes <br />October 14, 1986 <br /> <br />Council Business, continued <br /> <br />Gair noted that there are a few disclaimers in the report which <br />makes a planning tool a marketing tool. <br /> <br />Gair assured Brandt she could assume there were no major changes <br />in what is suggested in the overall concept plan from what had <br />been seen in the documents previously submitted. <br /> <br />Benke stated the planning strategy that is built into the report <br />is contingent on there being a partnership between property <br />owners, proposed developers, and, to the extent necessary, the <br />city. <br /> <br />Williams asked if the Planning Commission had any discussions <br />about incorporating this into the Comprehensive Plan; Locke <br />stated they had and they will be discussing it further as to <br />whether or not it should be a formal part of the Plan, and noted <br />the details of the plan are consistent with the Plan. <br /> <br />Williams asked, if it is incorporated into the Plan in some way, <br />if it would necessitate an updated zoning ordinance; Benke stated <br />the Corridor Plan does not propose rezonings or subdivision, <br />which would be contingent on there being a specific project for <br />which changes would be needed. <br /> <br />Williams stated recent changes in state law require conformance <br />between Comprehensive Plans and zoning ordinances within a <br />specific period of time; Benke stated the Corridor Plan is consis- <br />tent with the Comprehensive Plan which is consistent with the <br />current zoning so that we are in compliance. <br /> <br />Williams requested that at some appropriate time the council and <br />the staff take a look at those questions. <br /> <br />4 Ayes - 0 Nayes, Motion Carried <br /> <br />Locke reviewed staff report concerning a Development Agreement <br />with James Senden for a 3.11 acre parcel located at 309 Fifth <br />Avenue N.W. <br /> <br />Senden requested that, because the Agreement did not include <br />Phase II of his project, a standard paragraph be inserted to the <br />Agreement, subject to approval of bond counsel, to provide for <br />additional tax increment assistance for the second phase of the <br />project. <br /> <br />Benke asked if additional assistance would be given upon commence- <br />ment or completion of Phase II; Send en responded it would be upon <br />completion of Phase II which must be started by a given date. <br /> <br />Locke stated he had no problem with the concept, although neither <br />he nor our bond counsel had an opportunity to review the proposed <br />addition, and believed it would be reasonable to give conditional <br />approval; Sinda confirmed it is consistent with what the city has <br />done in the past. <br /> <br />Page Fourteen <br /> <br />Development Agree- <br />ment: James Senden <br />Report 86-244 <br />