5. HRSR 11-05-2012 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

really makes the area viable as a destination because the businesses 1. I fully believe in the historical FEEL of the downtown area. That don't complement each other well. Expanding the area will allow is more the result of the looks of the buildings (mostly brick) (design development of a new area the purpose of which could be better standards) and the close proximity than the actual structures defined. themselves. 6. I'm not in favor or requiring the rehabilitation of homes that have 2. While the core downtown has a historical FEEL, I believe there is exceeded their life expectancies. Times have changed. Energy very little historical significance to the downtown itself. Yes,for some efficiencies have improved greatly. Building materials and codes have residents and former residents,it brings back memories (nostalgia),the changed. Styles have changed. Desired amenities have changed. To future of the City is not in looking backward,it is in looking forward. require someone to keep a style house favorable in the 1920s (or Keep in mind the 1980 population was less than 7,000,in 1990 it was whatever period) is inefficient and will eventually cause blight. Yes, less than 12,000 and in 2000 it was less than 17,000. It is now about incentives might be possible now,but eventually,structures degrade to 23,000. Of the 7,000 who were here in 1980,I would guess less than the point of being very cost inefficient and/or unsafe. half remain whether due to moving or death. So we're preserving "nostalgia" of the past for maybe 15%of our current population-a 7. I do not favor retaining the Water Tower and will oppose the use number that is ever decreasing. The Plan talks about"creating a new of ANY city money to preserve it. I truly believe the effort to preserve history." That won't occur holding onto someone else's past. it to this date was the result of the actions of a select few. In 2002, costs to repaint the tower were stated to be from$50,000 to$100,000. 3. The Core Downtown Statement says to rehabilitate and redevelop The cost to remove the tower would be less. Ownership was stated to - but it also discusses the Brick and S. Main Blocks as needing be in ERMU and nearly all discussion went via ERMU and the HPC. "historical rehabilitation". If those blocks are "off the table",that Even ERMU voted to tear it down in 2002. Updates were not pretty much eliminates much of the potential redevelopment. When provided to the Council and no approval for the application for the the Metro Plains developments were being considered,it was discussed National Register was requested of the Council. Then,just last month, that a Phase 2,encompassing the area from Granite Shores to the it was disclosed during a budget session that it looks like the City is the Cinema Building could be possible. Again,with proper design actual owner and the cost to repaint would be close to$400,000. standards,I still see that as a viable redevelopment project. Apparently,staff new this in December or before;however,it was never mentioned to the Council. It has been stated the painting will 4. The Plan doesn't really seem to discuss the viability of the occur only if grants are received to pay for all of it. I have no objection businesses in the area. Having a mere "location" doesn't make the area to that,but I will not vote to approve the use of City funds. I am also "destination." How will the realignment of Jackson Street/ King hearing(but not from information provided to the Council), Street affect the Jackson Street buildings? What is the "hook" to get apparently, there may be concerns about the structural integrity of the people to want to come to the downtown area-especially the core water tower... the cement at its base may be degrading. downtown? Maybe entertainment?? 8. The section"Previous Relevant Studies" should include a full 5. I believe the core downtown area is too small of a commercial discussion about the Historical Context Study. While the Context area. I think it should be expanded (but not extremely)but with good Study is discussed a bit several sections later,it provided an actual "historical feeling" design standards. I don't believe the current size professionally prepared and researched account of why the area is really Draft as of November 5,2012 -Part IV, page 10 -