Laserfiche WebLink
123 <br /> <br />Cox asked how we can reassure the community that Council is not recommending <br />everything in the corridor study. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tolbert said that the Council wanted to include the corridor study as an <br />appendix to make people aware that it is out there. Mr. Tolbert noted that it is a <br />conceptual study only, and it was never intended to include the study verbatim, and is <br />referred to as conceptual in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Tolbert said he will be <br />recommending a process for addressing zoning changes in the corridors. <br /> <br /> Responding to a question from Mr. Caravati, Mr. Tolbert said that the appendices <br />are there as references and guides, and until there is an ordinance to back it up, they are <br />nothing more than that. <br /> <br /> Mr. Toscano said that approval of the Comprehensive Plan does not give <br />developers any vested rights, noting that only comes in the zoning ordinance. <br /> <br /> Responding to a question from Mr. Caravati, Mr. Tolbert said there is nothing in <br />the Land Use Plan that incorporates the Torti Gallas study. Mr. Tolbert said the zoning <br />ordinance will be tailored to specific corridors. <br /> <br /> Ms. Richards said referring to the study as conjectural may be better than <br />conceptual, and she said that she sees the corridor study as a study, not a plan and she <br />would like that made clear. <br /> <br />Mr. Toscano noted that the study was conducted by a top notch consultant. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox said that the corridor study was probably the most comprehensive <br />undertaking for a community of this size and he thinks the work done on it was <br />exceptional, though he feels they did not consider all environmental impacts. Mr. Cox <br />said he agrees with the word conjectural. Mr. Cox said he is not sure that anything would <br />be served by not including that portion of the study, and asked if there is a drawback to <br />not including that portion. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tolbert said that even if the study is adopted as an appendix, it is not law, but <br />only guidance to the City. Mr. Tolbert said that if Council wants to take out the part on <br />the Emmet Street corridor, it could be put hack in as the zoning ordinance is developed. <br /> <br /> Mr. Toscano suggested adding "and further development by City Council" to <br />subsection two. Mr. Toscano noted that a lot of things will have further refinement over <br />time. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox said his preference would be to remove the Emmet Street section from <br />the corridor study. <br /> <br /> Ms. Richards said she would accept that, but feels it fails to appreciate the number <br />of concerns of the neighborhoods adjacent to other corridors. Ms. Richards said that <br />when the City works with neighborhoods on adopting the zoning ordinance, we will need <br />to work to protect them. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch said he thinks the Venable neighborhood raises good points, but said <br />he feels the study represents an attempt by Council to get ahead of development and <br />protect neighborhoods. Mr. Lynch said he would not be in favor ofpulling Emmet Street <br />out of the study as there are probably issues like this in every neighborhood. Mr. Lynch <br />said it stands as an appendix, and he thinks conceptual is the appropriate word. Mr. <br />Lynch said that details will go through the neighborhood process and he does not think <br />holding up the process is necessary. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox said he thinks there are some unique pressures on Emmet Street and he <br />thinks it needs a process all its own. <br /> <br /> <br />