Page 166 - Michigan City, IN US Highway 421 Corridor Plan

5.5 Implementation Action Plan

Implementation Action Plan an initiative with the City. On the other hand, some high-priority
Table 5.23, Implementation Action Plan, includes a prioritized items may prove difficult to tackle in the near term due to budget
list of action recommendations derived from the various plan constraints, the lack of an obvious lead entity or individual to
elements of this Corridor Redevelopment Plan. The synthesized carry to initiative forward, or by the community’s readiness to
table does not include every action recommendation found take on a potentially controversial new program.
throughout the Plan. As configured, the Implementation Action Progress on the Year 1-2 items, in particular, should be the focus
Plan details the “to do” list of priority action items showing of the first annual review and report a year after the Corridor
the general time frame for initial implementation and who is Redevelopment Plan adoption. Then, similar to multi-year
responsible for initiating, administering and participating in the capital improvements programming, the entire action agenda
implementation process. list in Table 5.23 should be revisited annually to decide if any
additional items are ready to move into the next near-term action
As mentioned, Table 5.23, Implementation Action Plan, provides
a starting point for determining immediate, near-term, and timeframe, and what the priority should be.
longer term task priorities. This is an important first step toward
Plan implementation and should occur in conjunction with the
City’s annual budget process, during Capital Improvements
Program (CIP) preparation, and in support of departmental work
planning.
During the final Corridor Stakeholder Committee (CSC) meeting,
members were given the opportunity to prioritize action items
listed in Table 5.23. Based on committee member input, items
with 15 or more points were given primary priority, placing the
action item in the 1-2 year timeframe. Action items with five
to 14 points were given secondary priority and were placed
in the 2-10 year timeframe. Secondary priority items may be
moved into the primary priority category over time based on
available funding and initiative to begin the task. The majority
of the action items for the corridor plan received four or fewer
points, placing them in the secondary priority category with a
timeframe of 10+ years. Tasks in this category may be of lesser
priority yet can be implemented intermittently over the 10-year
timeframe if funding is not able to complete larger projects, but
the amount of funding can complete one or more minor projects.
Action items with indicators in more than one timeframe are
larger scale projects that may take years to implement; it is not
intended to a variable priority.

The near-term action priorities should be revisited by the
Michigan City Redevelopment Commission, City officials and
staff annually to recognize accomplishments, highlight areas
where further attention and effort are needed, and determine
whether some items have moved up or down on the priority list
given changing circumstances and emerging needs. It should be
kept in mind that early implementation of certain items, while
perhaps not the uppermost priorities, may be expedited by the
availability of related grant opportunities, by a state or federal
mandate, or by the eagerness of one or more partners to pursue

5-47

Adopted: August 16, 2016 Implementation 5.0