My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2012-07-10_study_session_full
Public Access
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Plan Commission
>
Minutes
>
2012
>
2012-07-10_study_session_full
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/7/2012 3:19:55 PM
Creation date
12/7/2012 3:19:46 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
34
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />Ms. Locke stated she understood the appeal of ready money, but at the same time, in the long- <br />term we have to think about reconciling community interest in a way that is appealing. She <br />stated she acknowledged we do not have a day-to-day parking study and thinks additional data is <br />needed to understand parking. She stated she wants more data and a better understanding of <br />parking demands in the future to have a better context. Ms. Locke stated if she were forced to <br />make a decision she would vote to support the entire Plan as is and it derives something good for <br />University City. She added that there is a lot of fear from merchants about moving from free to <br />paid parking on their economic future which is another issue that should be studied. She stated <br />that maybe there is additional research out there. She added that we hear a lot of emotion and <br />anecdotal information, but it is hard to make a decision without additional data. She stated she <br />wants to understand the parking impact on potential businesses. <br /> <br />Ms. Greening asked if there is a compromise so we can get this going and still be one of the top <br />communities but we need to slow down a bit because if we do not have a majority on board, it <br /> <br /> <br />Mr. Lai stated that staff recognizes that and does not want to rush the Plan Commission to <br />making a decision and staff also recognizes the need for a parking study. He stated that the Plan <br />calls for that as a second step because the Plan is a conceptual vision. He stated it is recognized <br />that parking is indicated as one of a number of things that require in-depth study, not just this <br />parking lot, but looking at a healthy parking condition for the entire Loop. He stated it was listed <br />as a logical next step of issues to be looked at, whether it can be done, it may not be the scope of <br />this project. He stated that when the grant was awarded, it was not the intent to get that in-depth, <br />it is conceptual and a lot of things warrant an in-depth study. He stated that if there were even a <br />ed <br />that we want to supply that information, but do not know how much time and money it will <br />require. <br /> <br />Mr. Senturia stated there was also the security issue, real and perceived and they are important <br />elements that were raised by business owners and we should get data about those issues. <br /> <br />Mr. Lai stated that staff would look into other communities. <br /> <br />Mr. Senturia stated it had been a good exchange of ideas and thanked the consultants and staff. <br /> <br />Mr. Lai stated that staff appreciated the open minds and understood that the Commission is <br />looking for what is best for the community and staff feels the same way. <br /> <br />The meeting adjourned at 9:15. <br />tm; <br /> E <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.