My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-17-05
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
10-17-05
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2012 10:46:46 AM
Creation date
11/14/2006 4:26:02 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.
/
25
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
<br />TCAAP Update <br />October 13,2005 <br />Page 2 of3 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />3. Access from County Road I <br /> <br />When we last met with the National Guard, many months ago, it was left that each party <br />(City and Guard) needed to draw up a list of issues that would need to be addressed in <br />order to proceed in discussions regarding the access. When I last spoke with a Guard <br />representative, he indicated that he had put a list together and shared it with his superiors, <br />but that what they really wanted was to know exactly what our request would be in terms <br />of a land swap. I am not sure if we are prepared with that information; I think we are <br />open to discussing options. I think we also had basically slowed down all discussions <br />while we were waiting for the appraisal process to proceed. In any case, I would like to <br />discuss this further during the work session, and determine some additional steps to take <br />in regards to this topic. <br /> <br />4. Interim Agreement <br /> <br />If we are going to proceed with negotiations, we will likely have some expenses for <br />professional services (legal, etc.) Without an agreement with CRR, those would be, at <br />least temporarily, City expenses. Negotiation of an agreement may take some time, so <br />we may want to at least start those discussions. But as a preliminary step, CRR has <br />suggested the possibility of a meeting with the City to discuss in general where we are at <br />and what kinds of activities could be taking place, and sharing ideas. If Council is <br />agreeable, this could be scheduled, similar to our previous development team meetings, <br />first thing in the morning perhaps a day in early November. Please provide direction and <br />I can proceed with scheduling such a meeting. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />5_ Response Action Agreement <br /> <br />As previously mentioned, there will be a meeting November 28 at I :00 to discuss the <br />Response Action Agreement. I have asked Mike Comadeca to attend that meeting since <br />he has been involved previously and I think it is critical that the City's interests are <br />protected in this document. If you are interested and depending on his flight times, we <br />can schedule a meeting for Council to meet with Mike that day (perhaps late afternoon). <br />It might be an opportunity to just get his thoughts on the process thus far and on strategy <br />as we move forward. He can also share some of his recent experiences working on <br />transfers of military property. Please let me know if you would like such a meeting <br />arranged. <br /> <br />6. Density Discussion <br /> <br />There has been a suggestion that it might be timely to begin some discussions regarding <br />density. If Council is interested, I would suggcst that one approach would be to start with <br />some basic education and information. By this, I am thinking of some tours to see <br />different product types with different density levels. This would not only assist the A <br />density discussion but it will also assist when we discuss design standards. For example, ,. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.