2012-05-23 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Ollendorff stated that to consider development as shown goes back on promises made to developers on that block. It also goes against urban renewal plans. He stated it violates redevelopment agreements between the Land Clearance Redevelopment Authority, the Plan Commission, and City Council; redevelopment agreements entrusted to the Planning and Development staff to enforce. He stated that he gave his word as City Manager to developers that there would be maintained in perpetuity 290 surface public parking spaces. That is what redevelopment agreements show. The words are not there, but that was the intent, in return for their investment in University City. That particular parking lot was a key portion of development and to violate that now goes against promises made. He stated that he had called City staff to locate copies of the redevelopment agreement and it could not be located. He stated that he did not think staff made those agreements available to the consultants. He added that this subject has come up every few years for the last 10 years and each time City Council has said no; they are committed to maintaining 190 free public surface parking spaces. He stated that three years ago an application was submitted to the City proposing condos at this location and was rejected by stakeholders. Two years ago in the mayoral campaign the subject came up and both candidates agreed that they would not propose building condos on this property. He added that were here. He added that it would be a major change in direction that has been repeatedly denied by City officials and would violate promises made to developers and he hopes this section will be deleted from the Plan. Steven Stone, property owner in The Loop, addressed the Plan Commission. Mr. Stone provided a summary of the properties he and his father had owned and developed. He stated that parking became an issue due to an increase in automobile use. He stated that the parking lot began to turn the area around in addition to the vision of developers. In the late 1990s, the decision was made to stop trying to sell about 2/5s of the north portion of the parking lot. It was offered to Walgreens at one point. Mr. Stone stated that the decision was made to make it parking and to pave it as well as to eliminate Enright, and things began to accelerate with the development of The Loop. The Plan would be the first public document that reflects the aspirations of the community, but it would ignore the history of the development and the lessons learned from it. He added that those who have spoken have knowledge of the history of the area. He does not disagree with the idea that there may be future density that will require additional parking, but there are ways to have additional parking. Structured parking means that even the surface parking will be paid parking. He stated that they will not be able to do structured parking in place of lots and have it not be paid parking. He stated that the parking lot makes the area attractive. The last time this issue came up, the opposition was extraordinary. He stated that he community aspiration. He stated that he was not contacted about the proposal and there would be a lot of opposition to what would otherwise be a good plan. He added that the offending recommendation should be eliminated. Ms. Greening asked if Joe Edwards was informed of the parking proposal. Mr. Stone stated that Mr. Edwards was opposed to it. Ms. Moran stated that she got the letter from the LSBD last night and read through the Plan. She stated that she could not find information about all the available parking envisioned in the Plan. tm; E