Laserfiche WebLink
290 <br /> <br />ORDINANCE: CLOSING. PORTION~OF, PARK PLACE SOUTH OF LANE ROAD <br /> <br /> Mr. Huja stated that the Planning Commission recommended <br /> approval~of the closing of~a portion of Park Place with the <br /> following conditions: 17 A turnaround'be provided; 2) <br /> Easements be retained for maintenance~and repair~of the large <br /> storm sewer; 3) A 20 foot wide maintenance and repair <br /> easement be r,etained and any~ ~onstruction proposed in~ithis <br /> area must be approved by the City; 4) A 55 foot access <br /> easement or~ 'right-of-way,be dedicated to the City para~llel to <br /> the southern railroad tracks for a possible future loop road <br /> around~'the~hospital area; 5) The University Real Estate · <br /> Foundation should pay the, fair~ market-value,for this .i' <br /> property; 6)The right-of-way.~be zoned R-3 Residential <br /> Multiple Dwelling~as on, the adjacent property; and 7)~The <br /> City Attorney investigate the possibility of the University <br /> Real Estate Foundation providing services in kind in the <br /> amount of the fair market value for persons in the Fifeville <br /> Neighborhood who are on public assistance programs. <br /> <br /> Mr-. ,Hendrix Stated, that staff did not recommend charging <br /> the,Real E'state Foundat.ion for the proPerty because others <br /> have not been charged for the property when streets,have been <br /> closed.. <br /> <br /> Mr. BuCk stated that while the City has not charged for <br /> streets that have been closed,~ people have.been charged~for <br /> rights-of-way. Mr. Buck noted concern with giving away City <br /> property valued at $125,000. ~ <br /> <br /> Mr. Gouldman stated-that the fair market value had been <br /> figured on the same rate as other adjoining property, but · <br /> because the City will maintain utility rights the value of <br /> the property would~be reduced significantly, <br /> <br /> Ms. Waters questioned whether Martha Jefferson Hospital <br /> had been charged for the property when-Council closed Taylor <br /> Street and Mrs., Gouldman.,replied that the. City had not charged <br /> for the property. <br /> <br /> Ms.~Waters stated that she felt it was important to <br /> treat the Real Estate Foundation fairly and noted that the <br /> property would be kept on the tax roll because it would be <br /> owned by the Foundation instead of~the University,, <br /> <br /> Mr. Hendrix stated that the University is planning to <br /> construct a parking garage on the property Which the CitY has <br /> encouraged for several years~. Mr, Hendrix noted concern that <br /> to change the City's policy at this time might send a <br /> negative signal to the, University. ~ <br /> <br /> Mr. Vandever questioned whether the City has the <br />authority to request an in-kind charge as recommended by the~ <br />Planning Commission. <br /> <br /> Mr. Gouldman stated that the COuncil has the authority <br />to charge a mutually agreeable price for,the property,,~but no <br />authority has been found for an in-kind payment. <br /> <br /> Ms. Waters stated that her preference,,would be to · <br />directly approach the University regarding a possible <br />contribution toward a neighborhoOd project. · <br /> <br /> Mr. Buck requested information on whether other <br />localities charge for property acquired due to a street <br />closing., ~- <br /> <br /> Ms. Waters requested that the City Manager'S office , <br />address further the question of public benefit,in closing the <br />street <br /> <br /> On motion by Rev. Edwards, seconded by Mr. Vandever, the <br />ordinance entitled "AN ORDINANCE CLOSING, VACATING AND <br /> <br /> <br />