My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
03/15/11
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Dissolved Boards/Commissions/Committees
>
Housing & Redevelopment Authority
>
Agendas
>
2010's
>
2011
>
03/15/11
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/18/2025 10:58:46 AM
Creation date
2/28/2013 1:43:41 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Document Title
Housing & Redevelopment Authority
Document Date
03/15/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
79
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
this, and is taking it under consideration. Development Manager Lazan said he would like to <br />formalize that offer and present it to Mr. Deal. <br />Commissioner Elvig questioned whether a monthly fee per stall would be charged to Mr. Deal. <br />Development Manager Lazan confirmed it would. <br />Commissioner Elvig asked how this fits into a Special Services District. <br />Development Manager Lazan explained the PUMA is different than the Special Services <br />District. The PUMA would oversee the SSD. <br />Commissioner Backous inquired if there is a disagreement on who owns the parking spaces. <br />Development Manager Lazan replied Mr. Deal states he paid for them once, and feels the City <br />should give them to him. He is aware he does not own the title. <br />Commissioner Elvig commented he would like to know more of the story before making a <br />decision. <br />Discussion took place regarding the differences between a Special Services District and a Master <br />Declaration, and which is most appropriate. <br />Motion by Commissioner Elvig, seconded by Commissioner Tossey, to formalize the offer <br />presented to Mr. Deal last week. <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Jeffrey, Commissioners Elvig, Tossey, Backous, <br />McGlone, Ramsey, and Wise. Voting No: None. Absent: None. <br />Case #1: Consider Amendment to the Development Management Agreement with <br />Regard to the Hot List <br />City Administrator Ulrich reviewed the staff report. <br />Chairperson Jeffrey questioned why the contract would be amended now and not wait for the <br />new contract that is due in one month. <br />Development Manager Lazan explained this amendment establishes the rules to keep the work <br />he has done so far as the property of the City. If the contract is not amended, the protection is <br />not in place. <br />Commissioner McGlone said it is a good idea to request the amendment for the new contract. <br />City Administrator Ulrich noted this clarifies the criteria for both sides. If this contract is <br />terminated, both sides are protected. <br />Housing and Redevelopment Authority / February 15, 2011 <br />Page 3 of 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.