HomeMy WebLinkAboutA023 - Memo from Merlin Pfannkuch request to not approve URA 14214 Kellogg Ave.
Ames, 1A 50010-5447 22
NOV 20MI.
Nov. 22, ,2000 C1TY_C_0_K___j
CITY OF AMES.-IQWA
Pe: Proposed urban revitalization area for Somerset
IMai yor Tedesco and members of the City COLIFICi 1-.
Of necessitq, I must write this before I'm able to review the council action
form for the Nov. 26 meeting in connection with this proposal . So I
apologize in advance should I make a misstatement. The city clerk's office
indicated Tuesday (Nov. L IL(Nov. 21) that 4 this proposal was going forward for Nov. 28
ns far as they knew at that point.
1 ask you to not approve this urban revitalization request, if the final
proposal is in general similar to the previous council action forms and
counci I action in connection with this proposal earlier this fall.
I 5ee no 1 usti f1i cati on fur" this; request, and feel it is in fact counter-
productive if Ames is serious about encouraging wanting village
developme,nt. If we are serous about village development, it seems to me
that Our first"village" should succeed or fail on its o,;,in merits., not succeed
,with the help of an extensive. subsidy. (I do not know the extent to which I
d-,,vould consider t5omerset to be a "village-" In other words, is i t
-) prL I ent
Ejolicu to ask the rest of the taxpayers in Ames to subsidize this "villaae?"
11q answer based on the earlier action forms and discussion can be nothing
but a resounding "no."
Furthermore, I'm getting quite tired of developer's agreements that can be
altered simply upon request of the developer: Why do we waste staff time
developing these agreements if they are so easily altered.?
I di,d i,n s qou to not approve this re.Quest if the final oruposal is Qirnflijr
o t I on e �,t-opo'-ed and discu--sr-.d earlir-.r this fall.
f I)-r-1�ln L�P T a n/nk u c i
515--232-3319
merlinoclxpcpartner.net