Here is a synopsis of what happened yesterday at the city retreat.
It includes goals of the city.
You can read the whole thing which is on the live blog below.
After a full day of discussion, city commissioners decided they need to improve the value of the city, as well as the perceived value in the coming year. In the morning Friday they heard from department heads about projects and needs. In the afternoon they discussed goals.
City Manager Steve Archer gave a brief presentation on the financial state of the city, showing where revenues come from. His charts showed that while dollar amounds have increased, the actual buying power of those dollars has not increased since 1980.
The dollar amounts may be higher, but the buying power of what the city has with its revenues, is less than in 1980.
Here are the goals they settled on.
* Improve city efficiency.
* Annexation of commercial property
* No increase mill levy
* Clean city facilities , vehicles. It was pointed out that some departments look shabby and need to be kept up.
* Compare building codes with other cities to see what needs to be improved.
* Provide growth incentives
* Increase and improve the housing stock. Possibility of getting involved in a building project.
* Do more to attract retail
* Growth of hospital site
* Work on vacant buildings downtown
* Increase parking, restuarants and clubs
* Develop recreation, softball fields.
* Improve access to rivers.
One idea that was discussed at length was the idea of getting a building project started. They could pick out a block, or a small area, and give good incentives to get builders to build homes.
They feel there is a market for houses, but builders are not interested in building.
Lane Massey pointed out that there are many good incentives in place right now, with a 90 percent tax break in building and major improvements and other things. Interest rates are also low, so it is a good time to build.
Picking a certain area, such as a block, would be a good starting point commissioners believe.
They would also like to improve the downtown by encouraging businesses to open in vacant buildings. They would like to see more restaurants downtown. They also believe allowing alcohol in some of those businesses would help.
A couple reactions -
ReplyDeleteDo more to attract retail -- isn't that interesting. I wonder if that would include big box stores.
I am not against responsible drinking, but I do not see much responsibility when I drive around this town anymore. I really hope they do not invision Aggieville or Mass street or whatever when the think of a vision for our down town. Many folks around here lack responsibility.
I suppose the limited parking (perceived or not) downtown isn't conducive to the business plans of some restaurants.
ReplyDeleteOut of all those goals, of course, the one to focus on is that *gasp* they might let people drink alcohol...... and we all wonder why the town is going down hill.
ReplyDeleteI still think that revitalizing the historic downtown area and revitalizing the current housing stock will add more value to the town. However, I am obviously in the minority since the town voted to spend 27 million developing an area 2 miles outside of town.
Ark City is stuck in the 70s and 80s mentality of greenfield development that is not the future. The future is in infill development and, once again, we have missed the boat.
Infill development?? In the early 70's that was called Urban Renewal. Guess the pendulum swings and everything old is new again.
ReplyDeleteI'm wondering why.
ReplyDeleteI don't see anyone trying to "infill" develop. Though I do see the city offering many incentives including 90% tax rebates for 10 years, free land, and some grants to fix up a number of homes downtown.
What I do see is business wanting to develop north of town. The hospital, that proposed Big Box that didn't make it, Walgreen's, the strip center at the top of the hill, the new Wal Mart, and so on.
I understand why we want to "infill" the downtown area, but what is coming doesn't seem to fit. Why complain? It looks like we may start growing again. Maybe if we do start growing there will be some reason for developers to want to "infill".
Infill development isn't just the downtown area. Infill development is a part of urban renewal but it isn't mutually exclusive. Urban renewal deals more with revitalizing blighted areas. Infill development is a smart growth technique that proposes developing areas that already have infrastructure instead of ploppping something half hazardly in the middle of a farm field.
ReplyDeleteI have no problem with Walgreens or even the new walmart those were all built on land that was already built within the infrastructure of the city.
Any urban planner worth a grain of salt will tell you that spending money on infill projects is far superior to greenfield development both environmentally and economically.
At this point, it doesn't matter but I would like to see future development decisions that are using tax payer money to be decided by someone with an ounce of urban planning knowledge as opposed to a "hospital board".