Laserfiche WebLink
Council Proceedings <br />City of New Brighton <br />April 5, 1977 <br />Special Meeting <br />Motion by Bromander, seconded by Hardt to deny the <br />HRA plan as proposed and dire c t ..that the HRA conduct <br />no additional work regarding the plan until a study <br />is completed, such study to be completed by <br />July 6, 1977 <br />Motion by Senden to amend the motion to add the <br />following reasons for denial: <br />1. The proposed redevelopment area and tax increment <br />district is much too large in area and too <br />ambitious in terms of time span to be <br />practical. <br />2. It is evident from HRA and City Council hearings that <br />the citizens and business people are opposed to the adoption <br />of the plan. <br />3. The plan does not adequately address the traffic flow <br />-- problems in the redevelopment area. <br />4. The land use proposals made in the plan should be <br />reconsidered to make certain that the most feasible, <br />desirable and economical way has been found. <br />5. More time is needed to consider the proposal by the <br />New Brighton Businessmen's Association. <br />6. The study of City ordinances currently underway by the <br />City Council, Planning Commission and HRA Task Force <br />and the HRA should be completed before the HRA plan <br />is implemented so that chances for attracting development <br />are known. <br />Councilman Senden further moved that the HRA be directed not to <br />proceed with further redevelopment planning until further <br />direction is given by the City Council. <br />Motion failed for lack of a second <br />Motion by Fisher, seconded by Hardt to amend motion <br />noting reasons for rejection as being that the statutes <br />required action to be taken within 30 days and*such <br />action within that time limit is not possible with -the <br />pending study to be done <br />4 ayes - 1 naye (Senden) - carried <br />Vote on motion as amended <br />4 ayes - 1 naye (Werdouschegg) - carried <br />7 <br />