My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
RM 03-17-78
sbend
>
Public
>
Redevelopment Commission
>
Minutes
>
1970-1979
>
1978
>
RM 03-17-78
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/5/2012 5:06:22 PM
Creation date
9/24/2012 2:27:08 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
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
COMMISSI <br />Friday, I <br />ER'S REGULAR MEETING <br />rch 17, 1978 <br />FLOOR DISCUSSIONS <br />(Mr. Brademas continues): <br />At the same time, in terms of the housing, the ratio that we are required <br />to provide for the housing of the elderly is a quarter to one; so we would <br />only be talking about 25 or 26 parking spaces, because we are talking about <br />104 apartments, the exact same number that we have built at the 100 Center. <br />I cap tell you that since the 100 Center has been completed, we already <br />have a waiting list. So if any of the members of the Commission, or others <br />who eel that we are getting overbuilt with housing for the elderly, I can <br />tell you that from my own studies and observations, that I think we can, in <br />the foreseeable future, absorb all 1,600 units in demand. The rate of <br />inflation in this country is going to continue to advance, and I am afraid <br />at a very rapid rate. The people who are most adversely affected, clearly <br />are those people who are elderly, and on generally fixed incomes. One of the <br />most critical means they have is housing, and yet the rents on this housing <br />would be $340.00 a month. I would hardly say that it is for low income, <br />but the federal government has programmed to provide assistance of the <br />difference. Henceforth, this three million dollar project would be on the <br />tax rolls, and it would be privately owned, privately managed, and it would <br />make a fine contribution to the community. Now I don't stand here today and <br />tell you that I speak for Mrs. Berg and Mrs. Hawley, or for anyone else who <br />is in that area; but I have had a chance to meet with them and with others. <br />I can tell you that they have impressed me with the sincerity of their <br />concern about staying in business in the downtown. They are not out to <br />attempt to stop the commission's progress as such. What they have indicated <br />tom is that if the Commission would do nothing more than take the steps <br />that they have already taken to acquire this property, write down the price <br />that this development could carry forward, and make the land available for <br />any eveloper; then they would be ready, willing, and able to go forward. <br />Obviously, we understand that there could be any developer who could make <br />a pr posal on the Century Mall. We are not here to suggest that the Commission <br />does anything out of character, or is not consistent with what has already <br />been done in the past; but as I have said before, these two pieces of property <br />are already on the Commission's acquisition list. At the same time I am <br />confident that if the Commission would move forward in this manner, and the <br />administration would use their good offices to secure a reservation of funds <br />for the construction of the housing, that these two activities would not <br />require any grant of funds by the City or by the Federal Government. We <br />are not asking the City to build any parking structures, or to build a <br />covered pedestrian walkway; we are only asking the redevelopment commission <br />and the City administration to take actions, which will have little or no <br />adverse effect on the dollars and cents of the City. <br />-10- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.