Laserfiche WebLink
Member LeTourneau stated that as a business owner on the corner he could represent the <br />feelings of both businesses and the EDA in their desire to help the area survive and make it <br />better. He feels the information from this survey will be great information not only for existing <br />businesses but to determine what could come in and work. The survey will allow the area to <br />move forward. <br /> <br />City Administrator Norman stated he thinks the survey will provide the City with direction to <br />allow and encourage commercial nodes to exist. <br /> <br />Member Kiefer reiterated that this will provide statistical data to back up the assumption that the <br />corner is worth renovating, or provide facts that indicate talks should begin to try and relocate <br />the businesses there. With this information if a developer comes in and wants to invest or do a <br />redevelopment project, the EDA and the City will be able to make good decisions. <br /> <br />Member Kurak added she would imagine the information could be used to promote the corner. <br />She added that while she understands the value of the information she doesn't want to repeat, <br />and pay again, for what has already been done. <br /> <br />Member LeTourneau recommended moving forward but having staff review what might be <br />duplication of the previous study. He reminded the Committee to keep in mind that the <br />McComb Group has already done some of the work and a new company would be starting from <br />scratch. <br /> <br />Member Kiefer indicated the proposed amount includes dollars for the McComb Group to work <br />with KKE Architects. If the decision is to delay that piece of it, those dollars should fall out. <br /> <br />Motion by Member Kiefer, seconded by Member Gromberg, to recommend to City Council that <br />they move ahead with the market analysis contingent on staff meeting with the McComb Group <br />to negotiate a more cost effect proposal by taking into account the work they've previously <br />performed. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Riley, Members Kiefer, Gromberg, Kurak, Steffen, <br />and Strommen. Voting No: None. Member LeTourneau abstained. <br /> <br />Case #3: Grosslein Beverage Property/Bulow Inc. Property <br /> <br />Associate Planner Wald stated Grosslein Beverage owns the <br />Comfort Suites. The parcel is zoned commercial and Duke <br />Beverage, is interested in developing the site with a restaurant. <br /> <br />vacant parcel located next to <br />Grosslein, owner of Grosslein <br /> <br />The subject property is approximately 1.9 acres in size and contains a large drainage pond that <br />was designed to handle the drainage from Comfort Suites and any development on the subject <br />vacant property. Due to the large drainage pond, the site does not provide for adequate space for <br />parking and a restaurant facility. <br /> <br />Economic Development Authority / January 13, 2003 <br /> Page 5 of 7 <br /> <br /> <br />