Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance And Land Development Code topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff proposes aligning Renaissance Zone and economic‑incentive committees to streamline approvals
Summary
City staff presented a proposal to align the Renaissance Zone Authority and the Economic Development Incentive Committee, and gave an update on the land development code consultant outreach. Board members expressed concern about preserving distinct authorities; staff will take the concept to the city commission for review.
City planning staff proposed aligning the Renaissance Zone Authority and the Economic Development Incentive Committee to streamline applicant review and reduce repetitive steps in the incentives and permitting process.
Nicole, a city planning staff member, told the board that staff and the assistant city administrator had met with the city commission to review citizen advisory boards and that the proposal is intended to align missions and reduce duplication, not to eliminate board positions. She said staff will work with the city attorney and Century Code requirements as the concept is developed and that any formal change would be recommended to and reviewed by the city commission.
Board members raised concerns about preserving separate authorities and expertise. One member said the Renaissance Zone Authority applies a narrowly defined state‑mandated standard and that combining boards could risk losing experienced volunteers. Staff replied the intent is to coordinate and synthesize review so applicants have a single, clearer path through site plan, pre‑application and incentive review processes.
Staff also provided an update on the city’s land development code rewrite and consultant outreach: consultants have been meeting one‑on‑one with local developers to identify deficiencies in current code and to collect input on developer needs. Staff said the consultants will return in November and that an initial draft of the code revisions will be shared with the board in roughly three to four weeks.
There was no motion recorded to change board composition during the meeting. Staff asked the board for conceptual support to take the recommendation to the city commission for further legal and procedural review. Board members asked staff to ensure any change would comply with state law and preserve subject‑matter expertise among advisory members.
Board members and staff said summer outreach to industry and the public produced robust participation for the growth plan phase; staff noted that code‑level outreach tends to involve a narrower audience of builders and developers. The board asked staff to return with further details as the consultants produce draft code language and as any formal governance proposals are refined.
