My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Revitalization Commission Agenda and Packet 2015 11 09
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
REVITALIZATION COMMISSION
>
2004-2019 Revitalization Commission Agendas and Packets
>
2015 Revitalization Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Revitalization Commission Agenda and Packet 2015 11 09
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 11:52:31 AM
Creation date
11/9/2015 7:30:12 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
RCPKT 2015 11 09
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
33
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 />October 12, 2015 <br />Page 4 of 6 <br />Commissioner Menaker made a motion to approve. Seconded. <br />Approved. <br />c. 550 S. McCaslin Project Description <br />Commissioner Gorsevski, Commissioner Fisher and DeJong met and <br />developed project description in packet. It has been sent to Malcolm <br />Murray and Sam Light. Issue is to address blighting factors at the former <br />Sam's Club site. More detail to be added to project description — what is <br />in the packet is an introduction. <br />Chair Becker asked for context, timeline and sequence of event, high level <br />review of project. <br />DeJong: Description: laying out goals, actions we'd like to see on property, <br />full redevelopment of site. Do we want to consider rezoning proposals? <br />Commissioner Menaker said re -tenancy is the goal. That lets staff know <br />what sort of RFP we are looking for. DeJong would like to know what sort <br />of projects LRC and Council want in order to develop the RFP. <br />Intent of Council and expectation of city: be sales tax generator and <br />launching pad for enhanced vibrancy of corridor. Mayor Muckle said <br />Council may support some sort of redevelopment; something that meets <br />current zoning. Chair Becker likes: Step one if nothing comes of first RFP, <br />then broaden the description of RFP. There was discussion of whether or <br />not to limit the scope of proposals. There could be creative ideas we have <br />not thought of. <br />Commissioner Menaker does not want to fight a rezoning fight. Would <br />prefer to limit and narrowly define the RFP. <br />Commissioner Fisher said it should be narrow so people know what the <br />expectation is or broad to allow for all ideas to come forward. <br />Commissioner Gorsevski said the RFP would define zoning. <br />Commissioner Tofte does not see reason to limit RFP. He supports a <br />broader RFP. <br />If RFP has flexibility, Urban Renewal tool sits on sidelines are processes <br />run their course. <br />Chair: Mechanics: we are providing insight as to how to shape RFP — <br />does council need to approve RFP? DeJong said Council does not have <br />to but we could ask them to give feedback. Given the interests of LRC <br />members, feedback would be good. <br />5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.