My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-28-93 Council Workshop Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1993
>
04-28-93 Council Workshop Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/3/2009 3:36:19 PM
Creation date
7/31/2009 2:55:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
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).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />APRIL 28, 1993 <br />some projects where the City may be willing to do <br />almost anything to attract, and others that the City <br />would not support at all. <br />The Administrator indicated that it is currently <br />difficult to react to developers without an up-to-date <br />Comp Plan. The Administrator felt that to make <br />redevelopment work, the City will need some type of <br />marketing component. The biggest issue will be the <br />clearing of existing buildings from sites. <br />The Planner agreed that the missing link may be a <br />marketing plan or market research document. The <br />Planner pointed out that the last phase of the updating <br />process is the implementation phase. Zoning ordinance <br />tools are implemented to achieve land use goals. That <br />is a fairly passive implementation tool. Other tools <br />may be economic development programs. In the <br />implementation phase the City will also prioritize <br />goals and determine what will be done to achieve those <br />goals. <br />The Administrator pointed out that after the Plan is <br />updated, it would have to be revisited annually to make <br />sure it fits changing conditions. <br />The City Planner suggested that the implementation <br />phase of the plan would be a separate book that could <br />be easily updated on an annual basis. <br />Keis again indicated that the Planning Commission wants <br />to be pro-active and needs to have a common vision with <br />the City Council and staff. <br />The Building Official agreed that there was a need for <br />an updated Comp Plan that could be used as a tool for <br />the City's continued growth. <br />Hanson pointed out that redevelopment is expensive, <br />asking if the City should be involved in the <br />acquisition of property to be cleared and made ready <br />for redevelopment. Hanson pointed out the need to <br />assemble smaller parcels for redevelopment. <br />Fred Schletty suggested the need for professional input <br />in identifying the best use for properties. Schletty <br />felt that as part of the process of updating the Comp <br />Plan, the City needed someone to get it moving in the <br />right direction. Schletty noted that the current plan <br />is 15 years old, and asked how good a plan is when it <br />site on the shelf and is not used. The City needs a <br />Comp Plan that can be used. Schletty also pointed out <br />that there are liability issues involved as well. <br />Page 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.