Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />2� <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />40 <br />41 <br />42 <br />43 <br />44 <br />45 <br />RHRA �Ieeting <br />�Iinutes — Ylonday, August 29, 2016 <br />Page 13 <br />Member Etten concurred with President Roe. <br />Tar�eted Sectors (per displayed slide) <br />Ms. Kvilvang outlined areas to include in the policy based on survey <br />infonnation: clean-up of polluted areas, clean-up of blighted areas; special <br />purpose projects (e.g. SE Roseville); retaining a major etnployer; <br />demonstration of extraordinary efficiency practices; significant rehabilitation <br />of eYisting properties; provided housing options not currently available; and <br />preservation or stabilization of malls and/or major commercial nodes. <br />Without objection, President Roe noted these areas articulated the goals of the <br />REDA as laid out by Ehlers. <br />President Roe clarified that n�-�t�t-�����-���'��� �t�t�e�--w ��e�e—�� <br />, ' he <br />didn't want bonus �g�factors or cate�ories outweighing the general policy; <br />duly noted by Ms. Kvilvang. <br />Open Cotnment - Areas the City DOESN'T want to Provide Assistance <br />Ms. Kvilvang reviewed the displayed list of those areas, including: retail <br />establishments unless smaller stores (e.g. not strip inalls); most multi-family <br />housing, LDR, projects that pollute with noise or contaminate the air, ground, <br />or water; any project from staff or the City Council not vetted in the charrette <br />process within the community; anythin� not providing good jobs and benefits; <br />no bi� bos stores; no adult entertainlnent, no pawn shops, and no tnicking <br />terminals. <br />Member Willmus suggested additional discussion on the charrette process and <br />noting the expense of such a process, questioned if it would be required if the <br />REDA was looking to financially assist a coiporate headquarters use, for <br />example, in an area properly zoned as such and not directly adjacent to less <br />intense uses. <br />President Roe opined it sounded like the intent was for any city-initiated <br />projects to ensure sufficient public participation. <br />REDA EYecutive Director Trudgeon stated it was addressing if staff came <br />forward with a multi-million dollar project without public input versus a <br />developer using a vetting process with the public. <br />Without objection, President Roe noted that, the REDA agreed <br />with the list, excluding the charrette process in circumstances as clarified and <br />noting other city standards related to the process.. <br />Open Comment - Areas the Citv DOES want to Provide Assistance <br />