Laserfiche WebLink
168 <br /> <br /> Item 6b <br /> PUD-91-10, Red Bear, Inc. <br /> Application of Red Bear, Inc., for a lower-income exemption to th~ <br /> Growth Management Program for an approved 20-unit senior apartment <br /> development (PUD-91-10) to be located at 443-465 Division Street. <br /> Zoning for the property is PUD {Planned Unit Development) - High <br /> Density Residential (SR92:435) <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer declared the public hearing open on the <br /> application. <br /> <br /> Mike Madden, 2776 Hartley Gate Court, explained that on May 5, <br /> 1992 the City Council approved this project. He has requested an <br /> exemption from the Growth Management Program. He further explained <br /> that he was not pursuing a loop hole in the Program to be eligible <br /> for this exemption. He understood that to be eligible, an <br /> applicant would have to provide 25% of its units as affordable; he <br /> is providing 100% of the project as affordable, with 15% as very <br /> low income. He then referred to Page 4, Paragraph 2 of the staff <br /> report and explained that this subject was something that he had <br /> planned on addressing at a later time, but after talking with Mr. <br /> Swift he decided to address it now. Mr. Madden asked that Council <br /> also consider the fee waivers mentioned in the staff report. <br /> <br /> Robert Cordtz, 262 W. Angela, member of Mayor's Affordable <br /> Housing Task Force and Committee, spoke in favor of this project. <br /> He asked for Council's support. <br /> <br /> There being no further testimony, Mr. Mercer declared the <br /> public hearing closed. <br /> <br /> Ms. Scribner asked for clarification on the Growth Management <br /> Ordinance. She asked if there was an exemption of 100 units on top <br /> of the 650 units. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift explained that if there are more than 650 units, any <br /> additional units would need to be lower income units. In any year, <br /> there could be as many as 750 units approved for growth management. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver was not in favor of giving an exemption for 1992 <br /> since this year is close to ending. He understood that there is <br /> room in 1993 to grant the exemption. He would rather see the <br /> exemption granted in 1993 and the fees waived as recommended in the <br /> staff report. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr commented that when this project was originally <br /> approved it was with the understanding that it would be exactly <br /> what was presented. <br /> <br /> 11/3/92 iO <br /> <br /> <br />