My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2007.03.22 PC Minutes
Hugo
>
Community Development
>
Planning & Zoning
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Minutes
>
2007 PC Minutes
>
2007.03.22 PC Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/2/2015 2:27:28 PM
Creation date
2/20/2015 11:29:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commissions
Meeting Date
3/22/2007
Document Type
Minutes
Commission Name
Planning
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
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
Planning Commission Minutes — March 22, 2007 <br />Page 3 <br />Schumann said it was no surprise the proposed plan resembled the 1998 plan. The same types of <br />comments had been received by the public with the only difference being downtown parks and <br />community center. <br />Mcallister said the 1986 Comprehensive Plan called for Hugo to remain rural, nothing was <br />anticipated to the west. The 1986 plan was not like the 1998 plan because it was hi jacked due to <br />public apathy. <br />LaValle asked the CDD about the ownership of the rail. <br />The CDD stated that the portion of the rail south of 145th Street was owned by Burlington <br />Northern and was not within the regional authority. <br />Bailly asked about the role of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) <br />The CDD explained that TIF did not have to be in place for downtown development to occur. <br />Weidt said he thought 20 years was pretty slow. He indicated he appreciated criticism when it <br />was constructive, and felt they had gone slow and listened to the public. He thought the <br />guidelines were good, and the City needed to have them. <br />Kleissler thanked those who commented and hoped they would continue to do so. She was in <br />favor of more time to review the plan. <br />Bailly pointed out that it was not being proposed to be built now with tax money. She had <br />concerns about development along CSAH8 and how the downtown areas would connect. <br />The CDD restated that the City had no plans to be the developers of downtown. <br />Weidt made motion, Schumann seconded, to approve the Downtown Design Guidelines and the <br />Downtown Master Plan. <br />Ayes: Bailly, Weidt, Schumann <br />Nay: Kleissler <br />Motion carried. <br />The Commission took a short break. <br />Tax Increment Financing Plan (TIF) <br />The Commission considered approval of the TIF Plan. The CDD explained that City staff, in <br />conjunction with the City's Economic Development Authority (EDA), had been working to <br />create an implementation plan for the downtown guidelines and concept plan. The <br />implementation plan included the use of Tax Increment Financing as the primary implementation <br />method. The City held a widely attended public workshop in January of 2006 to discuss <br />implementation methods, including Tax Increment Financing. Since that time, the EDA has <br />worked to create a TIF District that qualifies under state statutes. He explained the Planning <br />Commission's responsibility was only to determine whether the TIF plan was consistent with the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.