City Council Agenda and Packet 1997 09 02

Home Browse Search

Howard recalled that the City needed the second half of 80th Street much more than the first half for a the reason of increasing the buffer on the back half of the property. Because the City already had the large area up front, there was not a reason for the City to have that. Lathrop concurred with Howard. Mayer stated that it was clear to him, according to the formal documents, that the City did not convey this. If Council were to do this, it should be done by formal action. Keany felt Council was in the position of having to clean up things that should have been taken care of prior to December 1994 when the land was transferred. Davidson stated that the developer did not finish his paperwork which should have been done at that time RECESS Davidson called for a five minute recess.. Davidson called the meeting back to order. Tami Tanoue, Griffiths Tanoue, City Attorneys, answered the question of whether activities of the City to date which include budgeting for improvements or landscaping and doing some planning with regard to landscaping on Lot S3, whether those kinds of activities require a conclusion that the property thereby is being used for parks purposes. She had looked at the Budget document itself. She concluded that these activities in and of themselves do not require the conclusion that the property is currently being held for park purposes. Richard Judd, Ditto 7 Corporation, was in Louisville in 1993 and 1994 in conjunction with the preliminary development plan for Lot 5 (Mann Theatre site) as well as Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 7. He recalled that in late 1993 the City suggested that the time to effect the transfer would be when they came in with a PUD for Lots 1 and 2. He stated that in January 1994 they were negotiating the subdivision agreement. In 1994, he had submitted a copy of some language for Section 8 of the subdivision agreement which contemplated recognizing the exchange. He remembered being told by Susan Griffiths on February 15, 1994, "Let's don't put that in the subdivision agreement. It's not typically in our subdivision agreements. We want the subdivision agreement to be something that deals with the actual development of the property. Handle that during the PUD process." He stated that it never occurred to him that there was anything other than a definite agreement with the City as to what would happen with the vacation and exchange of the southwest portion of 80th Street for the northeast portion of 80th Street. Davidson asked if staff or the City Attorney had ever suggested that he not go through the formal land transfer process. 7