Laserfiche WebLink
Redevelopment Framework Task Force Minutes Page 4 <br />August 13, 2007 <br />------------------------------------------ <br /> <br />realigned Main Street concept in the Draft Plan, crossing over Jackson Avenue and begin elevating <br />and curving up and over the railroad tracks and Highway 10 (near the grain elevator) and terminating <br />at Main Street between Lowell and Morton. Ms. Mehelich responded that the City Council has made <br />it very clear that they will not accept the “at grade” option whatsoever. <br /> <br />Member Dana Anderson stated that the City Council compromised the integrity of the <br />redevelopment planning process when they dismissed the Task Force’s recommendation for <br />Highway 10 a few months ago. <br /> <br />The Task Force continued to discuss the issue, including the disruption that elevating or depressing <br />Highway 10 would cause for the community. <br /> <br />Member Keith Holme added from a downtown business owner’s perspective that if Highway 10 is <br />elevated or depressed “you might as well remove all commercial business from downtown” due to <br />the lack of visibility and direct access. <br /> <br />MOVED BY MEMBER LOUISE KUESTER AND SECONDED BY MEMBER DAN <br />TVEITE, APPROVING THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION REGARDING HIGHWAY <br />10 WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN: <br /> <br />1) THE ILLUSTRATIVE MASTER PLAN SHOULD SHOW JACKSON AVE. AND MAIN <br />STREET BEING AT GRADE (THIS WOULD REPRESENT THE IDEA THAT IT IS A <br />PLACEHOLDER, ALBEIT THE TEXT OF THE PLAN WILL STRONGLY ARGUE <br />FOR A GEOMETRIC STUDY). <br />2) THE TEXT OF THE PLAN WILL CONTAIN PLAN ILLUSTRATIONS THAT <br />REPRESENT THE VARIOUS OPTIONS THAT HAD BEEN CONSIDERED. <br />3) THE MATRIX FOUND ON THE ORIGINAL DRAFT (PAGE 31) WILL BE MODIFIED <br />AS SHOWN ON THE “ROADWAY DESIGN OPTION” ATTACHMENT. <br />4) THE PLAN’S HIGHWAY 10 CONCLUSION IS THAT A GEOMETRIC STUDY (TO <br />INCLUDE SOIL BOILINGS) IS CRITICAL TO AVOID ANY NEW <br />REDEVELOPMENT EFFORTS CAUSING CONFLICT WITH FUTURE DESIGN AND <br />CONSTRUCTION. <br /> <br />THE MOTION CARRIED 12-1. MEMBER DANA ANDERSON OPPOSED. <br /> <br />Member John Anderson added that while he appreciates the effort that staff put into the Highway 10 <br />options advantages/disadvantages chart included in the meeting packet, he feels that it is incomplete. <br /> <br />Member Niziolek added that more options need to be considered for Highway 10 in order to attract <br />future redevelopment to the area. Ms. Mehelich responded that the Draft Plan narrative includes the <br />following verbiage “the Task Force recognizes that other unexplored roadway options and <br />configurations may be feasible”. <br /> <br />Ms. Mehelich invited Task Force members to the August 20 City Council meeting when staff will <br />report tonight’s Task Force direction regarding Highway 10. <br /> <br />7. Next Steps <br />Ms. Mehelich discussed the anticipated Task Force timeline through the end of the year, inviting <br />members to attend Board/Commission meetings and other public meetings in which further public <br />comments will be gathered on the Draft Plan. <br /> <br /> <br />