04-28-1997 EDA - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

, 3 EDA Meeting#32 • March 10, 1997 Page 2 1 She proceeded to briefly summarize various sections of the agreement. 2 3 MOTION/SECOND: Koopmeiners/Trude to Approve Resolution No.97-EDA-63,Approving and 4 Authorizing the Execution of a Development Assistance Agreement with Kenmark Partnership,LLC. 5 6 VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried 7 8 B. Consideration of Resolution No.97-EDA-64,Adopting the Highway 10,Section 9 Redevelopment 9 Plan as Proposed by SRF Consulting Group,Inc. 10 11 MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Koopmeiners to Approve Resolution No.97-EDA-64,Adopting the Highway 10, 12 Section 9 Redevelopment Plan as Proposed by SRF Consulting Group,Inc. 13 14 Ms.Trude stated she feels SRF Consulting Group did a fme job on the plan,however she had one problem 15 with a section and would like to adopt the plan in all parts except in reference to Parcels 1,2 and 3. She stated 16 the purpose for this is that the City Council just adopted an ordinance keeping day care facilities out of areas 17 within 200 feet of highway traffic and this would follow that plan in keeping children out of unhealthy 18 conditions. It would also use the economic corridor for business opportunities which have a higher tax base. 19 20 MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Stigney to amend the plan and go with the"if then"scenario for Parcels 1,2 and 3 21 on land use. • 22 23 Mr.Patrick Peters of SRF Consulting Group,Inc.noted that this plan is to be used only as a guideline and 24 provides direction in making policies. This should be used as a tool for when developers come in to evaluate 25 the various elements in trying to decide what is appropriate for different areas. However,it was their feeling 26 that the residential scenario made the most sense from an access standpoint and also from balancing the benefit 27 that will come to the multi-family as well as mutual benefit that comes through the EDA/PTW properties on the 28 corner. He would suggest that the plan be adopted as it is and only use it to weigh the applications. 29 30 Ms. Trude stated the plan refers to community input meetings and yet she knows that many people in that area 31 are concerned that something not be allowed in that area which will create an impact on their neighborhood and 32 she feels multi-family and condensed housing would do so. Furthermore,whatever the council endorses with 33 the plan will very much guide the Planning Commission and staff. 34 35 A discussion followed. Ms.Trude stated she would be more comfortable with the word"accepting"in the 36 resolution,than the word"approving". 37 38 Commissioners Trude and Stigney asked that their Motion/Second be withdrawn. 39 40 Commissioners Quick and Koopmeiners accepted the amendment to the Resolution,changing the word 41 "approving"in the resolution caption to the word"accepting",and also in the 8th paragraph of the resolution, 42 changing the word"approves"to"accepts". 43 44 VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried 45 46 REPORTS: • 47 48 Report of EDA Board Members: 49