HomeMy WebLinkAboutA001 - Council Action Summary dated September 8, 2015 ti
COUNCIL ACTION SUMMARY
Meeting Date: 9/08/2015
Agenda Item#: Council Comments
SUBJECT: The letter dated September 2, 2015, from Chuck Winkleblack relating to 3505 and
3515 Lincoln Way
ACTION TAKEN: Referred to staff for a staff report.
MOTION BY: Corrieri
SECOND BY: Gartin
VOTING AYE: Betcher, Corrieri, Gartin, Goodman,Nelson, Orazem
VOTING NAY: None
ABSENT: None
By: Diane Voss, City Clerk
Electronically Sent to: Kelly Diekmann, Planning and Housing Director
r
pKt��
Date: September 2, 2015
To: Honorable Mayor and Ames City Council members
From: Chuck Winkleblack
RE: 3515-3505 Lincoln Way
You will be discussing my mixed use project at Tuesday night's meeting. We have been working on this
project for almost 2 years now from my original request. We have worked hand in hand with city staff
to develop the ordinance that is being applied to this particular project from the beginning.
I have 2 requests: First I would ask that if there is not any meaningful objections to this project that you
consolidate the 2"d and V readings at your next regularly scheduled meeting on September 22". The
reason for my request is that the way the calendar lays out in 2015 we will lose 3 weeks of construction
schedule time heading into winter. Your next meeting after September 22"d is not until October 13".
That is 21 calendar days which is a long time in the construction world. If it were not this time of year I
would not make the request, I know you don't like these requests. We have been talking about this
project for a long time. If it has to go through all three readings it will have been before the planning
and zoning commission and council 8 or 9 times since the concepts inception. I don't believe we are
trying to push this through without a chance for public input.
My second request is to start the process for urban revitalization for this site. I made the initial request
to council in June of 2008, 1 believe that the council supported the"concept" of urban revitalization in
2008 although I don't have the council action form to attach to my letter. Kelly (planning director)
thought that I should bring this issue up now even though we would not be seeking abatement until
2017. That was one of the worst(if not the worst)areas in town prior tome purchasing the property.
That was the reason that I asked for urban revitalization prior to purchasing the property.
I understand that you granted tax abatement to settle pending litigation by Breckenridge (my
competitor)a block to the East. I have paid taxes on this vacant commercial land for 7 years through
some very bad economic times. I worked for almost 2 years closely with staff to mold and refine the
new ordinance for mixed use projects so that they are done right,function well and look great. My
competitor(less than a block away) blew into town from Texas,fought with neighbors, staff,council and
pretty much everyone they came in contact with. They tried to manipulate our codes and ordinances in
ways that no one ever could have imagined. They initially threatened and ultimately filed a law suit
against the city. Those folks now have been granted tax abatement and will have a significant financial
advantage over my project if my project is not granted the same abatement. That hardly seems fair
when I followed the rules,went thought a long process, worked with staff, paid my taxes and asked for
abatement before I bought this property.
This is not an agenda item tonight, Kelly thought that I should raise the issue now while the project is
working through the approval process.
Th k you in advance for your consideration of these two topics
J,', W,I/.�
Chuck Winkleblack