Revitalization Commission Agenda and Packet 2014 12 08

Home Browse Search

Revitalization Commission Minutes November 10, 2014 Page 3 of 4 summarized the quasi - judicial hearing process and the need for Council to act as `judges' for property right decisions. Regarding the LRC's review of development proposals, the Mayor always recuses himself when LRC has a land use referral to discuss. c. LRC Study Session with City Council January 13, 2015: Template questions for presentation to Council were discussed and brainstormed as to what the Commissioners would like to see on the presentation. Highlights and successes: • Core Area TIF Bonds • Stitching things together — looking at things holistically, logically • What is starting to come out of the ground has been 10 years in the making • Solved problems and made decisions. • Postive cash flow is a significant accomplishment. • Regional detention and funding toward construction • Alfalfa's opened • Story of looking at whole urban renewal area and inter - history What worked well? • Constructive interaction with staff (Troy). Enjoys staff updates • Important how much support we get from staff • Having staff share knowledge (bonds, regional detention) • Interaction with council went well • Mayor's presence helps reinforce synergy What did not work well? • Nothing - Group dynamic has been good. Issues have been resolved. Problems are from external parties (BNSF) List plans and goals for next year: • Reach out Village Square owners and new owners of King Soopers plaza. • Keeping abreast of what is happening with former Sam's club. • Highway 42 access and big picture of what is happening with 42 • Parking issues • Grain Elevator • How do we want to look at potential projects? • Signal at Short Street and Hwy 42 In what areas do you need Council input? • Seeing Council face to face is valuable, what is council's feedback • Council feedback on goals What does Board recommend the City fund in next year's budget? • Quiet zones 4