My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Revitalization Commission Agenda and Packet 2014 08 11
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
REVITALIZATION COMMISSION
>
2004-2019 Revitalization Commission Agendas and Packets
>
2014 Revitalization Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Revitalization Commission Agenda and Packet 2014 08 11
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 10:20:26 AM
Creation date
8/12/2014 11:32:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
RCPKT 2014 08 11
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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
Revitalization Commission <br />Minutes <br />June 30, 2014 <br />Page 4 of 5 <br /> <br />Commissioner Menaker said he would be reluctant to use urban renewal to <br />provide direct competition to existing businesses in the area. <br /> <br />Attorney Light stated the Conditions Survey is one step in a planning process <br />that needs to be undertaken. He stated the only question before the LRC at this <br />point is if the LRC that blight factors exist. <br /> <br />Commissioner Menaker stated the City has an IGA with the County. He asked if <br />the City and LRC are bound to that IGA if it expands the urban renewal area. <br />Attorney Light said the current IGA only applies to Highway 42 area and would <br />not automatically apply to any new area that is created. <br /> <br />Light said urban renewal plans can but do not require a TIF provision. <br /> <br />Light said the Condition Survey is one step in the Urban Renewal process. <br /> <br />Commissioner Menaker asked if urban renewal plans can be conditional on <br />zoning changes? Attorney Light stated that urban renewal plans can include <br />provisions regarding zoning. <br /> <br />Commissioner Fisher said he was skeptical the property was blighted but the <br />report convinces him there is blight. <br /> <br />Commissioner Tofte agrees with the Conditions Survey. <br /> <br />Commissioner Gorsevski agrees with the report. He asked Mr. Patten if there is <br />a planned obsolescence of the building and if the building is physically sound? <br />Mr. Patten replied that a structural engineer had not looked at the building but <br />ongoing maintenance has been minimal. <br /> <br />Commissioner Gorsevski said he thinks creative architects could come up with <br />some use for the building. He asked if the City has been approached by a large <br />single user? DeJong said he has approached large single users and they are <br />either not interested for not allowed by the restrictive covenants. <br /> <br />Commissioner Menaker said visibility, access, signage and other issues are not <br />allowing redevelopment. He stated if we use urban renewal, he would want to <br />be able to look at the whole site and at urban renewal in terms of helping all <br />existing businesses. <br /> <br />Chair Becker asked if there is a certain number of blight factors required. Mr. <br />Patten replied: <br /> If the property owners in the area consent, one blight factor is required <br /> Otherwise, four blight factors are required, except <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.