Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Counei 1 "1i nutes <br />June 25, 1985 <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Motion by Harcus, seconded by Blomquist, to WAIVE THE READING <br />AND ADOPT A RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND APPROVING <br />NC-72 SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: <br /> <br />1, THAT THE EXISTING BUILDING BE REPAINTED TO MATCH THE <br />PROPOSED NEW BUILDING, <br />2, THAT THE SIGNS ON THE EXISTING BUILDING BE REMOVED AND <br />REPLACED BY A NEW SIGN ON THE NEW BUILDING, AND <br />3, THAT THE REQUIRED 60 FEET OF FRONT YARD LANDSCAPING BE <br />PROVIDED WHEN THE ORIGINAL BUILDING ON THE SITE IS RE- <br />MOVED and to <br /> <br />APPROVE LP-183 SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: <br /> <br />1. THAT THE RELOCATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE SANITARY <br />SEWER BE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF THE CITY ENGINEER, <br />2, THAT 12 ON-SITE PARKING SPACES BE DESIGNATED, <br />3, APPROVAL OF NC-72, AND <br />4, CONFORMANCE WITH SITE AND BUILDING PLANS AS SIGNED AND <br />DATED BY THE APPLICANT AND THE CITY PLANNER. <br /> <br />4 Ayes - 0 Nayes, Motion Carried <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Winkels reviewed the staff report concerning an option agree- <br />ment to purchase the property at the northeast corner of <br />14th Street N.E. and Cleveland Avenue; the option amount is <br />a non-refundable $5,000; the developer has agreed to pay the <br />$5,000; the city would not be at risk; at the end of 90 days <br />the option will be exercised only if there is a project; the <br />city would move forward if the developer had signed a Devel- <br />opment Agreement; feels the price is fair and consistent. <br /> <br />Benke asked if the Development Agreement would, in writing, <br />cover our cost; Winkels responded the Agreement would be <br />signed pending receipt of the check, <br /> <br />Motion by Benke, seconded by Janecek, to AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR <br />AND THE MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN OPTION AGREEMENT WITH 5 & H <br />REALTY COMPANY, WITH THE ADDITION THAT IT BE SUBJECT TO <br />RECEIPT OF AGREED UPON CONTRIBUTION FROM THE PROPOSED DEVELOPER, <br /> <br />4 Ayes - 0 Nayes, Motion Carried <br /> <br />Blomquist requested an update from Sinda or Proper on whether <br />or not the cooperation issue had been resolved, <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Sinda reported he had met with Kalitowski, Day, and five <br />others from the MPCA along with Representative Knuth, At that <br />meeting the prOblems of our consultant not getting enough in- <br />formation was discussed and Kalitowski assured the city that he <br />would work with us. Sinda stated that John DraWl from our City <br />Attorney IS offi ce fe.el s the problems have been all ev i a ted and <br />that ~e can move forward, <br /> <br />Page Eight <br /> <br />Option Agreement <br />- S & H Rea 1 ty <br />Report 85-173 <br /> <br />Access Agreement <br />\oJi th MPCA <br />Report 85- 171 <br />