2012-07-10_study_session_full - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

perspective. She stated it was congested on that lot and use of the lot is apparent. She asked Mr. Senturia asked if we could hold off on that key question until after the presentations and Ms. Lewis agreed. Mr. Lai moved to the next issue. 2.Previous commitments and promises; development of the lot would go against previous plans. Mr. Lai stated that the urban renewal plan expired in the late 1980s and if a developer wanted to develop any parcel in this area they would have to do their due diligence. He stated that if there were an agreement, it is beyond the scope of this Plan to find out any restrictions on hundreds of parcels within the neighborhood. He stated that if a developer was going to invest millions of dollars in a project, they would do their due diligence. Ms. Riganti added that the urban renewal plan expired in 1986 and she wanted to acknowledge the tremendous efforts of the former Land Utilization Authority and Urban Renewal Authority and the risk they took by providing the parking lot to help turn around The Loop at that time. She stated it was a risk that came with consequences as we heard from Ms. Glickert at the last meeting, many businesses were taken through eminent domain to create the parking lot; it was a risk taken over 20 years ago in response to an existing situation. Mr. Senturia asked if staff had found any commitment that was discussed at length; a commitment not to develop that parking lot, and if they knew of any written commitment of any sort. He asked if staff had looked for it. Ms. Riganti confirmed that staff had that information. She stated that, as Mr. Lai indicated, any movement forward with development of the property, a developer would have to do due diligence and have information about the agreements on the property. She stated it is not clear if the agreements bind the City in perpetuity. She stated that staff does not have all the documents and this is because there is not a lot of documentation. Mr. Senturia asked what the nature of the documents was, regarding agreements. Ms. Riganti stated that some of the parking spaces shall be devoted to a specific business and there was other information, restrictions, and details that would be subject to legal interpretation. 3.There is insufficient parking in The Loop now and the Plan proposed less parking. Mr. Lai stated that the Draft Plan proposes more parking than is currently there. He stated that the claim of insufficient parking is that when it is fully utilized. He stated that we must look to the future if we want The Loop to thrive and attract more customers and without additional parking, we will face the same problems in the future. He stated that the claims that the Plan proposes less parking is not substantiated. Ms. Locke asked what was not substantiated; if it was the net parking. tm; E