City Beat

by Karen E. Culp

Walgreens is set to go up at the corner of St. Louis and National, making it the gateway to Civic Park.

After continuing a public hearing on a bill to rezone land to allow a planned development that includes a Walgreens drugstore, City Council voted Nov. 23 to approve the zoning request.

Only one council member, Russell Rhodes, voted against the measure, which provided for certain changes to Walgreens' standard suburban-style stores in order to make the store fit in better with Civic Park. Among those changes was the addition of a sign tower that would list both Civic Park and Walgreens names, and a fence that would surround the store.

The council had extended the public hearing in order to allow time for the Civic Park Advisory Committee to discuss the proposal and make its recommendation to council.

Committee Chair Bill Compere submitted a letter advising council that the committee reluctantly supported the Walgreens proposal. The advisory committee met for nearly three hours Nov. 18, and the Civic Park discussion took up a great deal of that time.

Some of the committee members were concerned about the sign's appearance; others said that the negotiations with Walgreens had ended well.

The committee is charged with developing guidelines for commercial development inside the park, and though discussion of such was on the agenda for the Nov. 18 meeting, the committee postponed the discussion until it meets again in December.

Council members Shelia Wright and Rhodes voiced concern over the sign that heralds the entrance to Civic Park's also selling household items such as cleanser and potato chips, but, Wright said it was a good proposal and one that everyone could live with.

Scott Harrell, who has been working for and representing Walgreens at the council and other meetings, said the company should begin clearing land for construction by early 1999, and that the store would be open by summer.

In other Civic Park news, the city has signed a contract with Tri-States Service Company Inc. and Borman Investment Company, at 725 and 909 E. Trafficway, 401 N. Sherman, and 301-303 N. Dollison, to purchase those companies' property for the first 35 acres of Civic Park.

The companies are owned by Robert and Joyce Mahoney, and the deal is set to close July 1, 1999, with possession on that date.

The contract was signed Nov. 23 and the city is to pay $1.9 million for the 5.68 acres of property.

The city also has offers to Sears for its warehouse on Trafficway and to DaBryan Coach Builders for its property on Trafficway. The city has offered $350,000 for the 1.45-acre Sears property and $730,000 for the 1.35-acre DaBryan property.

The final terms and conditions of those contracts are still being negotiated, but the city expects to have finalized deals within the next month, said Tom Finnie, city manager.

Still pending are deals with Thompson Pontiac GMC Cadillac, which comprises 5.44 acres and Greyhound Bus, which is sitting on 1.04 acres, said Fred Wagner, the city's real estate negotiator. Wagner said it looked as though the Thompson property would be included in a condemnation process, and the Greyhound Bus property may be, as well.

"The city may have to go that route, but we are still working on it. We've had a major contest on Thompson," Wagner said.

Two ordinances dealing with the placement of signs failed to pass.

One ordinance, which would have allowed for a sign to be placed in a stormwater detention area near the Campbell and Republic Road intersection, failed unanimously.

Councilwoman Teri Hacker said to allow the use would be "a slippery slope. I don't think we should allow signs in detention areas and I worry that if we start allowing them, we'll have to keep allowing them," Hacker said.

Another rezoning request,to take the land that Balanced Care Corporation's building sits on from a residential to an office zoning, failed. The request would have allowed the company to place a larger sign on its property.

Councilman Tom Carlson said he was concerned about the way council was debating the proposal, asking whether the council was authorized to get beyond asking whether it was a proper land use.

"Are we going to grill them about why they want to do that?" Carlson said.

Hacker responded that the council's job was to take into account all of the issues on what was brought before it.

"I think it's reasonable that we consider the potential use," Hacker said.

Hacker, Rhodes, Wright, Bob Vanaman, and Gary Gibson voted against the proposal, which failed.

[[In-content Ad]]