My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Business Retention and Development Committee Agenda and Packet 2014 11 03
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
BUSINESS RETENTION & DEV COMMITTEE
>
2006-2019 Business Retention and Development Committee Agendas and Packets
>
2014 Business Retention and Development Committee Agendas and Packets
>
Business Retention and Development Committee Agenda and Packet 2014 11 03
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 2:09:37 PM
Creation date
11/5/2014 8:30:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
BRADPKT 2014 11 03
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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
Business Retention & Development Committee <br />Meeting Minutes <br />October 6, 2014 <br />Page 2 of 4 <br />PUBLIC COMMENTSON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: <br />None <br />TH <br />TAKEAWAYS FROM SEPTEMBER 17DISCUSSION WITH KOELBEL DEVELOPMENT: <br />The BRaD Committee hosted a meeting with Buz Koelbel and Jeff Sheets of Koelbel and <br />th <br />Company on September 17, 2014 to discuss Centennial Valley.The BRaD Committee <br />discussed the major themes and takeaways from that discussion: <br />Koelbel seemed to say Centennial Valleyneeds mix of uses. <br />Centennial Valley needsresidential,better walkabilityand visibility. <br />Commissioner Reichenberg said we need to filter what someone’s agenda is but there was a <br />lot of truth to what Koelbel said. Do we make a recommendation to Council? We can’t ignore <br />the truth; we have to decide if more of the same works. <br />Commissioner Menaker said what Koelbel saidaligns with what Urban Land Institute said and <br />previous ED staff. No public voices to develop the property. We have clear understanding of <br />what needs to be done but no advocacy from constituents. This is a political problem. If the <br />Small Area Plan (SAP) goesthe way of the comp plan we are back to where we started. We <br />need to bring support to the table. <br />Commissioner Reichenberg: How do we start the dialogue? <br />Commissioner Menaker: Everybody wants progressbut nobody wants change. <br />Chair Pro Tem Lathrop said he wasenthralled by how meeting was handled. This is a Koelbel <br />problem that does not have recognition by those who are not in Centennial Valley. Community <br />does not have a sense that something is wrong in Centennial Valley. The small area planwill <br />be key to raisingtheissue. If Council has an appetite to embrace it as a problem for <br />community, it will become a discussion. <br />Council member Loo – the problem with the comp plan was there was no alternative voice. <br />Koelbel property is defacto open space (McCaslin and Via Appia). WardII does not perceive <br />there is a problem. <br />Chair Pro Tem Lathrop –There isno perceived need to change. Koelbel does not have <br />anyone lobbying. <br />Commissioner Pritchard: Koelbel hasbeen here for 20 years and nothing has changed. <br />History of valley is it has never been properly planned. Until council is ready to allow changes <br />to the area, Koelbel is wasting their time. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.