Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />I 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 />25 <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 />46 <br />RHRA 1Teeting <br />Minutes — NIonday, August 29, 2016 <br />Page 8 <br />Member Laliberte spoke in support of the minimum assessment agreement to <br />protect value of the development. <br />President Roe stated he had trouble setting a minimum, as noted by Member <br />Etten. In reviewing current values, President Roe noted retail values were <br />high; and he didn't want to have a policy in place to help retail. Therefore, <br />President Roe� stated he would support a minimum assessment agreement as <br />an excellent way to protect those values. <br />Member Etten stated his agreement with the majority. <br />Without objection, President Roe concluded the REDA had determined that the <br />policy �vould provide for no minimum value per square foot�, but would <br />pursue a minimum assessment ab eeinent. <br />Ratio of Public versus Private Investment and Levera6�ing Resources <br />Ms. Kvilvang noted most cities didn't put this in their policy, but staff included <br />the information in their staff reports to the REDA when any request came <br />forward. <br />Member McGehee stated her preference if subsidizing buildings, that they <br />included an improvement over current stock, �vhether for housing or any other <br />development coming forward. <br />Member Laliberte <br />public assistance, <br />assessment. <br />agreed, referencin� past projects that sought too much <br />with outside investigations concurring with the city's <br />Commercial Tar�eted Sectors (above black line on displayed slide) Inchided in <br />Policv <br />Ms. Kvilvang noted those preferred areas for commercial development (e.g. <br />corparate campus; office; small, non-retail business; non start ups but under <br />fifty employees; tnulti-tenant buildings; high-tech or major manufacture; <br />research and development; medical offices or facilities) that received priority <br />status from the REDA. <br />Ms. Kvilvang identified those iteins not a priority inclLided sit-down <br />restaurants, warehouse/distribution uses, small specialty retail, and "other" <br />identified as something new that would complete the community. <br />Member Willmus stated he was not supportive in general of retail unless it fell <br />within the local, family-owned categary. <br />President Roe agreed; but clarified a small sit-down restaurant may be <br />considered if it fell within the small business category. <br />