June 23, 1969 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Special Session 935, Minutes June 23, 196~ Page are a large number of children who go to school via 81st Street and possibly Groby Road - the traffic is heavy on Olive. He said he will not argue with the Council in its discretion in finding the best use for the land and the best way to raise more tax money, but he is just wondering whether the City doesn't have a long-range plan, and if so, what has happened to it and where does this proposal fit in? Mr. Fred Mishow, 711 Eastgate, the next speaker, supported the proposi - tion to rezone the property and to permit a Target Store to be built because he felts it will be a terrific stimulus to the whole of Univer- sity City. Mrs. Pat ~nson, 6522 Corbitt, upon being recognized, spoke in favor of Target because the senior citizens and poor people of University City have reached a saturation point with the taxes. Councilman Lieberman said he believes that two members of the Council do not have copies of the Ziercher Report which was made in the summer of 1967 prior to the rezoning of the tract to R-6 and the purpose of that study at that time made i,y t~e H~I Estate ~e~e~rck Corpdration waa to recommend the highest and best use for that tract. He quoted from the summary and conclusions of the Report. He said if the $3.5 million figure quoted by Hr. Guidera is correct as being the value of this land, then it is possible to assume the assessed valuation may go as high as $1.17 million - with this assessed valuation the schools would be collecting up to $63,000 a year and the City up to $17,000 a year which is about $80~000 and, in addition to that, if Mr. Sandberg is correct in that it will gross $15.5 million a year business the City can collect 1% gross receipts tax on that for another $155,000- - a grand total of some $235,000. He pointed out it would not be necessary to rezone the entire 21 to 22 acres at this time~ it has been indicated this evening that the company would be satisfied with a rezoning of the land on which the development would actually take place - something over 17 acres. ~.fr. Ellman, Director of Finance, corrected the figure quoted by Council- man Lieberman of $155,000 - ~,~r. Ellman said it would be $15,000. ~r. A1 Goldman, Supervisor of Planning, came forward. He said a member of the Plan Commission who has now left the Council Chamber, had intended to make a presentation on behalf of the Plan Commission. He said he thinks it is important at this time to bring to the Council's attention the points of view of the Commission. ~{r. Goldman reviewed in detail the historical background of the area under discussion~ delineating the points that had been stressed by the Plan Co~ission at the time of the previous rezoning and expressing the opinion that the reasons are every bit as valid toda as they were at the time the tract was zoned to R-6 on September 11, 1967, I{r. Goldman commented on some of the statements made by the Target Store representatives and other speakers, bringing out the fact that there would be cost to the City for police protection and traffic control. He contended that the tax income to the City in its General Fund would not exceed $20,000 a year and that from this must be deducted the cost of services for the Target Store. Mr. Goldman cautioned the Council that the City must be open for develop- ment and that it should encourage development by changing zoning only when it is in the interests of good development. In his opinion, however, this does not mean that any and all development should be accepted