Meeting 111695 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

David Yelton mentioned that the "straw plan" will not be conceived as initially established. There will be many variations. Lee Rafalow indicated that he hoped that a greater level of detail could be created by the Preliminary Design Subcommittee; however, if that is not possible he would be satisfied with a broader "straw plan" Verla Insko mentioned that there appeared to be consensus on creating a general "straw plan" for the next meeting. Also, a final Vision Statement and Value Statement will be presented at that meeting. Elio Soldi indicated that his main concern is that unless there is something concrete concerning options, there is not going to be interest from those outside this group. We need to have a concrete product so that we can solicit a response from the landowners and developers. He mentioned that all of the students plans had one thing in common. They acted as though they owned the land, when in fact, no one person controls the land. For example, every one of the plans had his 40 acres subdivided or incorporated with a neighbor. Dan Teichman suggested that this group needs to know what incentives /tools are available to encourage landowners /developers. He mentioned tax incentives, economic, transfer of property, etc. He suggested that questions be compiled and answered. Lee Rafalow mentioned a need for another subcommittee to look at tools and incentives and how they might be applied. He indicated that the Values Subcommittee discussed working on this task. Another task which must be addressed is to take the final or interim results to landowners and get their feedback. Lastly, defining what are consistent option sets for landowners to achieve the objectives. David Yelton mentioned that there might be an ongoing committee or structure that would advise landowners in future years to make sure that options continue to be known. Educating landowners would be helpful. Verla Insko summarized that there appeared to be consensus on having the Preliminary Design Subcommittee create a general "straw plan ". There will be final Vision and Value statements presented for approval. A new subcommittee needs to be created or the Values subcommittee could take on the task of defining incentives and disincentives that would drive the plan toward becoming a reality.. Lastly, another committee that would define possible options for various pieces of land. The main goal for the next meeting is to get through the "straw plan." Elio Soldi suggested that the Vision and Value Statements be accepted quickly at the next meeting unless there are major objections. Bob Strayhorn suggested that the committee that creates the "straw plan" be charged with deciding how to present it to the larger group. Irene VanDyke asked if the Transfer of Development Rights was a viable option.