HRA splits over survey’s open-space preference and proposals to sell peripheral parcels

A central topic dominated the meeting: how to reconcile repeated survey findings favoring open, natural park space with the HRA’s statutory role in redevelopment and the practical need to fund long-term maintenance. Chair told members to obtain raw Market Street Research data, and several members argued for a mission statement that either (a) prioritizes open space, (b) treats certain peripheral parcels as assets to be sold or developed to finance improvements, or (c) pursues a blended approach that leaves the central parcel as open while leveraging smaller parcels for revenue.

Committee members offered estimates for potential proceeds: one member suggested subdividing the 5th Street parcel could yield $5–8 million, while others warned of infrastructure constraints (water, sewer, flood-risk) and strong public resistance to housing on the central HRA property. Staff recommended a phased consultant scope—fiscal analysis, parcel-by-parcel ecological assessment, and visual design concepts—to test feasibility, costs and funding options. "If we start with a mission statement that reflects what the citizens want," one committee member said, "we should lead with that and see how we could possibly achieve it." Another member countered that the HRA was created for economic development and that selling part of Lot A could seed park improvements without ceding control to outside entities.

Why it matters: The board’s decision on mission and financing will determine whether the main HRA parcel is conserved as public open space or partially developed to create revenue for long-term stewardship. The meeting concluded with actionable next steps: staff will request raw survey data and provide blow-up maps; the board agreed to draft scope language for a consultant to produce three concepts the public can review.