Laserfiche WebLink
87 <br /> <br />CSX land for single family detached low/moderate income <br />housing which is compatible with the surrounding <br />neighborhood. <br /> <br /> Ms. Toscano agreed with Ms. Slaughter's recommendation <br />for high density housing and recommended that a signal be <br />sent to the community that the City wants proposals for the <br />property. <br /> <br /> Ms. Waters stated that she favored requesting proposals <br />for high density housing, but continued to favor mixed use <br />for the property and development that will pay the cost of <br />the land unless Council agrees to subsidize the cost. <br /> <br /> It was the sense of Council to reaffirm the plan <br />previously developed for the CSX property as well as to <br />consider any new proposals for residential development. <br /> <br /> With regard to the property adjacent to Pen Park, Ms. <br />Waters recommended that the property be land banked and that <br />a task force be appointed to begin lOoking at alternatives <br />for development which could be implemented when market <br />conditions are more favorable. <br /> <br /> Mr. Toscano stated that he would favor moving forward <br />with planning for the Pen Park property, noting that <br />developers anticipate the market three to five years in <br />advance. Mr. Toscano listed the following issues to consider <br />with regard to this property: environmental concerns, type <br />of housing, and affordability. <br /> <br /> Ms. Slaughter made a motion to form~a~group to develop a <br />plan for the Pen Park property using~the PUD concept, in the <br />middle to moderate price range, mixed type housing, with the <br />group to include but not be limited to at least one member of <br />Council, a former member of the Housing Strategy Task Force, <br />staff, and a developer. <br /> <br /> Rev. Edwards expressed concern about limiting the group <br />to considering the PUD plan and preferred~having the group <br />provide Council with a variety of choices. <br /> <br /> Ms. Waters recommended that the group develop a concept <br />plan for the property and that it also include an architect <br />and planner~ Ms. Waters suggested that staff bring a <br />proposal forward for membership of the~group and added that <br />she favored leaving options for housing type open for the <br />group's consideration. <br /> <br /> Mr. Toscano seconded Ms. Slaughter's motion, adding that <br />the group may not come back-with a recommendation for mixed <br />use if that is not specified. <br /> <br /> Ms. Slaughters' motion was defeated by the following <br />vote. Ayes: Ms. Slaughter and Mr. Toscano. Noes: Rev. <br />Edwards, Mr. Vandever, Ms. Waters~i <br /> <br /> Ms. Waters made a ~motion that a group be formed <br />to explOre a range of options, access points, and mixture of <br />housing types for the property adjacent to Pen Park. At the <br />suggestion of Mr. Hendrix, Ms. Waters added to her motion <br />that Council will pay the cost to obtain an estimate for <br />environmental reclamation of the property, Mr. Vandever <br />seconded the motion. <br /> <br /> Ms. Waters' motion waS approved by the following vote. <br />Ayes: Rev, Edwards, Mr, Vandever, Ms. Waters. Noes: Ms. <br />Slaughter and.Mr. Toscano.' <br /> <br />STAFF REPORT: LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM <br /> <br /> Mr. Gouldman presented a listing of ideas for Council's <br /> <br /> <br />