My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06.02 - Comprehensive Plan Update
Laserfiche
>
City Council (Permanent)
>
Agenda Packets (Permanent)
>
2012
>
02-08-2012 Council Meeting
>
06.02 - Comprehensive Plan Update
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/3/2013 2:34:42 PM
Creation date
12/3/2013 1:48:34 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
maintaining these neighborhoods. Second, there is a need to improve tax base and the overall value of <br />these neighborhoods. <br />After much research, discussion and public input, part of what the Planning Commission identified was a <br />need to lower expenses by reducing long -term street reconstruction costs and increase value (to attract <br />additional private investment) by improving the quality of living in the neighborhoods of the downtown. <br />For the latter, residents indicated that there was a need to make the neighborhoods more walkable and <br />have them connected to the parks and businesses within walking distance. <br />This is not a rejection of the automobile but an acknowledgement that there are a lot of financial <br />benefits that will accrue to the city and the property owners of this neighborhood by increasing their <br />options. It ties into other strategies, such as the need to reduce regulations for developing and utilizing <br />properties throughout these neighborhoods. <br />The Comprehensive Plan does not reduce the ability to drive around town but enhances the ability of <br />people to also get around by other means. <br />S. Plan is [contradictory], we want rural character but then put a highway <br />through the rural area <br />This is one view on the Highway 371 debate. While each Councilor has the right to keep the highway <br />realignment debate going in the political realm, it does the city no good to stifle all forward progress on <br />issues that require the approval of four out of five Council members over objections on the highway. If <br />-- we remain frozen with a Comprehensive Plan and ordinance drafted in 2004 —which was before the <br />highway decision, before the housing correction and in a very different economic situation —we are only <br />doing a disservice to this community. <br />Some may object to the highway location that was given approval through the Municipal Consent <br />process. The Planning Commission respects that, but there is an overriding need to prepare for the <br />future of Pequot Lakes, as a well as a responsibility of public officials to do so. Hopefully there is a way <br />that a philosophical difference can be acknowledged, but then set aside so as to develop the best plan <br />for the future of the City. <br />6. We are making it less likely that people will come to town <br />Again, this is another stance on the Highway 371 debate. Please review the following goals and <br />strategies of the Comprehensive Plan. As you will see, each of them seeks to attract people and <br />businesses to town and strengthen existing investments. <br />• Protect and enhance landmarks, historic and archeological sites, social gathering places, and <br />natural features in Pequot Lakes. (page 9) <br />• Support traditions, festivals and events that bring the community together and celebrate Pequot <br />Lakes' heritage. (page 9) <br />• Ensure that new development adds to the character of the community and enhances the sense - <br />of- place. (page 9) <br />3 <br />WWW.COMMUNITYGROWTH.COM WWW.STRONGTOWNS.ORG <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.