Laserfiche WebLink
6 <br /> <br /> Mr. Schil ling said the TJPDC legislative package was noted only as a report on <br />the agenda and he would have preferred to have more time to consider it. He said he is <br />not prepared to make any amendments at this time and cannot support it. <br /> <br /> The Thomas Jefferson Plan ning District Commission legislative package was <br />approved by the following vote. Ayes: Mr. Caravati, Mr. Cox, Mr. Lynch, Ms. Richards. <br />Noes: Mr. Schilling. <br /> <br /> Ms. Kelley said that the City's legislative package can be approved at the next <br />meeting, but a sked that action be taken on the charter amendment for the Airport <br />Authority. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch made a motion to approve the charter amendment for the Airport <br />Authority, Mr. Caravati seconded the motion, and it was approved by the following vote. <br />Ayes: Mr. Car avati, Mr. Cox, Mr. Lynch, Ms. Richards, Mr. Schilling. Noes: None. <br /> <br />REPORT <br />: EVALUATION OF ZONING ORDINANCE FOR PROPERTIES ON <br />CHERRY AND PRESTON AVENUES <br /> <br /> Mr. O'Connell explained that no actual appropriation is needed to use $60,000 for <br />the zoning ordin ance evaluation because the funds are in the capital budget, but direction <br />is being sought for the use of the money. <br /> <br /> Mr. Aubrey Watts, Director of Economic Development, said that the process will <br />allow for three concept designs for property in each of the Preston Avenue and Cherry <br />Avenue corridors. The zoning ordinance will be examined as it relates to specific sites. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schilling asked if this has ever been done before for private property owners, <br />and Mr. Watts said not to his knowledge. <br /> <br /> Mr. Sc hilling said this would be spending City money for improvements on <br />private property with no guarantee of return. Mr. Schilling asked what the City's position <br />will be if we do this and another property owner asks that it be done for them as well. <br /> <br /> Mr. Wat ts said our position would be that we are providing a unique interpretation <br />of the new zoning ordinance. <br /> <br /> Responding to a question from Mr. Caravati, Mr. Watts said it will provide <br />examples of specific sites and the types of density allowed and will show detailed design <br />concepts. It will also show property owners what might work on their sites. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati asked if Mr. Watts sees this as a valuable tool, and Mr. Watts said it <br />will help us see what might be or what we do not want on a site. <br /> <br /> Mr. Carava ti said he would like to see the return on investment for the Economic <br />Development Department. <br /> <br /> Ms. Richards said she sees this as parallel to design studies done for the <br />Meadowcreek Parkway intersection and thinks it is a good idea and will give us a bet ter <br />picture. She said she feels it is the next logical step after the corridor study and will also <br />stimulate development. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch said he supports the concept of mixed use development on these <br />corridors but has some issues with this mechanism, and not ed that the zoning ordinance <br />has not yet been finalized. He said he has concerns about whether the draft ordinance is <br />good enough for what we want to see. He said he does not think it needs to be visualized <br />in order to decide if the ordinance is good. H e said he also feels this is jumping around <br />the authority of the Board of Architectural Review. He said he also questions, from an <br />economic standpoint, if now is the time to do this. Mr. Lynch noted that other projects <br />have been approved that have gone n o where yet. He said he does not think this is <br />