Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Downtown Parking And Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council tables decision on purchase of 301 North Main property after downtown parking, TIF and development questions
Summary
Council voted to table consideration of a proposed purchase of most of 301 North Main Street. Council members and members of the public debated downtown parking supply, TIF increment performance and whether the site should be marketed for development instead of converted to a municipal lot.
The Mitchell City Council voted to table action on a proposed purchase agreement that would have transferred most of 301 North Main Street to the city for a proposed municipal parking lot.
City staff described negotiations with the current owner and said the transfer would allow construction of a majority‑block parking lot; the owner would retain a southwest portion for a future storage garage and refuse area. Staff said acquisition paperwork was ready and that funds were budgeted in this fiscal year for construction of a parking lot.
Council discussion, public comment and council questions focused on whether the parcel should be offered for redevelopment instead of becoming a perpetual public lot. Several council members and some speakers argued downtown already has substantial parking and that an RFP for private development could return the property to the tax roll. One councilor said a parcel inventory shows roughly a thousand public spaces downtown and questioned adding another municipal lot.
John Claggett, representing the United Methodist Church, told council the church uses the site for overflow parking during large events and funeral meals and asked council to consider community uses in any decision. City staff said the owner retains the right to keep the small parcel they requested and that the city would be required to provide an easement for access if the owner retains a garage area.
Council voted to table the purchase and directed staff to contact the property owner for clarity about his intentions and whether he will proceed under the previously discussed parking-lot arrangement. Council said staff should report back to the council before final action.
