My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Report to University City Council
Public Access
>
Advisory Board on Economic Dev
>
Report to University City Council
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2007 1:03:26 PM
Creation date
5/2/2005 3:48:10 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
69
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).
View images
View plain text
<br />Background <br /> <br />U City faces a unique opportunity. There is depressed real estate north of the City <br />that can be acquired and controlled to assure that the process of blight is reversed <br />before it can negatively impact the City. Land is a limited commodity. This will be <br />very valuable land in the not too distant future. Acquiring land also allows the City <br />the opportunity to focus on developing public sector industries that will create jobs <br />with sustainable futures. <br /> <br />One example would be to develop a series of recycling industries from waste streams <br />presently going to landfills. This requires the development of an industrial park that <br />can process waste. This can be done economically and can be used to remediate <br />brownfields, while creating jobs. There are funds available that could be parlayed <br />into helping such industries get off the ground. Other examples abound. In the <br />process of redevelopment, the City could promote energy efficiency and renewable <br />energy demonstrations that will make it a notable place to live and work. One of the <br />strong points would be the fact that, with Wellston, there would be five metro stops in <br />the immediate community. Each metro stop will eventually be the site of denser <br />redevelopment efforts. With future stops along the 1-70 corridor, there would be <br />additional draws for U City revitalization. <br /> <br />The concept of merging services and or governance was discussed in the light of the <br />four elements used to test the concepts <br /> <br />1. Will it add to a strength <br />The general concept of merger will strengthen the community by securing the <br />boundaries and reduce overall costs for the combined communities. It takes <br />advantage of the strengths that U City brings to the table. It will also strengthen <br />the communities that participate with U City in the effort. It is a 2-way street. <br />2. Will it help improve a weakness <br />It will eliminate the "northern boundary weakness". It will remove the perceived <br />weaknesses of U City being landlocked with little remaining developable land. It <br />will work to diversify the tax base of the new entity. <br />3. Can we exercise some control or have some real influence <br />U City has a very proactive populace that has now formed groups like this <br />subcommittee that may well take action to foster this effort. The City can work <br />with/through the Boundary Commission, it can purchase property directly, it can <br />support studies, negotiations, etc. <br />4. With investment, (time, money) is there a significant return <br />There are likely to be short-term costs/burdens, but these are expected to be <br />minor. However, the return over time is expected to be high. Just as U City had <br />vision and stabilized the City through the Occupancy Permit and code <br />enforcement efforts that the City initiated and maintained through the market <br />down turn in the City 30+ years ago. This is the kind of arc and time frame over <br />which the realization of the benefits to the new entity should be allowed to <br />mature. This takes vision and planning. <br /> <br />20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.