"Market and city analysis are two different things and people are going to be coming in wanting to buy ground and wanting to develop it may or may not be consistent with our comprehensive plan the way it's currently drafted, but we are the ones who have to address those problems," Lonergan said.
The obvious answer to someone who wants to develop land in a way inconsistent with the city's land use plan would be "no," City Administrator Jessica Kinser told commission members. The commission can recommend a zoning and land use map change if it believes a development that doesn't match either guide should be allowed, she added.
"If that's your argument I think you're putting a sack over your head and saying 'we're not going to have any progress,'" Lonergan responded, adding that he believes the process moves to9 slow and in turn sends potential developers to other cities.
Turpin followed with a thought she suspected commission members might have found hard to stomach.
"You have your comprehensive plan with a land use map that is supposed to serve as a guide and I get what you're saying is you have people coming in, you want the development," Tuprin said. "But sometimes development that isn't consistent with how you planned isn't good development. I know that's hard. I know this community wants development. I know this community wants progress."
Repeated attempts by Turpin in favor of the redevelopment focus were met with different points of opposition.
Commission member Jim McGraw pointed to the city's inability to attract CEOs or people looking for larger lots, asserting redeveloping the urban core was not the solution.
"If I'm an executive with RAIL.ONE or anybody else coming into town and I just sold a house on the East Coast or West Coast or South or wherever for $400,000, $500,000 and I need to reinvest that money, am I going to locate in the urban area that you are trying to redevelop? No, I'm not," McGraw said.