Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Roush said approximately 150 to 200 units. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver asked how long it has been under development? <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush said the first building permit was probably pulled in 1994. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis asked if the purchase price would be reimbursed through the development <br />of the adjacent properties? <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush commented the cost to purchase the properties would be from funds that <br />Signature would be advancing under the scenario described in the staff report. <br /> <br /> Anthony Pietronave, 2500 Vineyard Avenue, wanted to know if the purchase agreement <br />he recently signed would supersede the one he signed with Signature. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush said the agreement between the City and the property owners would be the <br />binding one. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver asked for clarification on the agreement process. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush said Signature initiated a number of agreements with the property owners and <br />if the roadway had gone through at that time then Signature would have signed the agreements <br />over to the City. We felt it was better to renegotiate the agreements with the property owners <br />in case the City would have to take over the project. <br /> <br /> Steve Brozosky, 1700 Vineyard Avenue, does not feel there is much traffic and there is <br />no hurry to expedite this project. His concern is with the realignment; a straighter road means <br />the speed of the cars will increase. He feels that Signature should be allowed to do the project <br />at a later time. <br /> <br /> Michael Goodwin, 1630 Vineyard Avenue, representing the Vineyard Homeowners <br />Association, felt if the City had followed through on the promises made to the property owners <br />for development in exchange for annexation, there would be contributions available for roadway <br />improvements today. The Association is in favor of Option 4, with the following changes: 1) <br />two years to complete a specific plan is too long, one year should be sufficient enough; 2) the <br />financial incentive of $250,000 should be increased to $500,000 to ensure that appropriate action <br />is taken. This is property that has been studied for over seven years. The Association would <br />like to point out that this reimbursement issue could ultimately wind up in arbitration and the <br />City become liable for much of the improvements if a buildable plan that supports the extremely <br />high cost infrastructure does not support the infrastructure. <br /> <br /> Otis Nostrand, 2654 Vista Diablo Court, commented on his concern for safety. He <br />would like to see this roadway developed expeditiously. <br /> <br /> 14 3/04/97 <br /> <br /> <br />