Land Use Study Circle
Oct. 13, 2002, Meeting
Terry Cullen’s comments regarding a Neighborhood Plan:
I. Neighborhood Plan objective.
The objective of these sessions is concession building, and creating awareness. Frame choices for the residents. It is not the idea of recommending a vision, or a recommendation of specifics. The public must understand their choices. Widen your scope to “What can be done with the present conditions of the Village District?” not “What can we do with this particular parcel?”
“Does it make sense to have more multi-family?”
“Do we need more space for parks and recreation?”
“What will this area be like in the future?”
You need to have a dream-like quality of DI for your children and grandchildren.
“What direction will DI go? How much will it cost?” Community must buy into choices. Frame your choices and the community gives you the “output.”
II. What does that mean?
III. How do we get there?
Latest plan adopted is from the 1970s.
Benefits of a neighborhood plan.
a. Community capacity building.
b. City has little to influence.
c. Common statement of interest.
d. Can possibly receive funding.
e. Can become higher on list to receive funds from Capital Improvements.
f. Any future land development on DI should refer to plan.
Mr. Cullen addressed the concerns raised from the last meeting:
1. Concerns of increased density. i.e. from predominantly single family to townhouses.
a. What is the current percentage of single family residences vs. multi-family? Unknown. Terry will find out and report back to us.
b. Regarding the location of multi-family residences, how far should they extend into the neighborhood? TC: This is where the residents decide if they want more or multi-family residences.
c. Some currently zoned RS-60 and RS-50 properties will have a Future land use of R-10. Others will have a Future land use of R-6. How does this equate to existing uses and can there be a R-8? There is no R-8 zoning. (The reason for the debate on this issue is that zoning of r-10 allows for townhouses, while R-6 does not.)
2. It is good to allow for different economic levels of housing.
3. What is happening with the housing on the airport property, zoned RS-60? Will this be a reality? P/SP vs M/AP. TC: This will not be a reality. No housing will be planned for the airport area.
4. Can zoning agree with land use? Currently there seems to be some discrepancies. TC: Zoning and land use are two different things.
5. Commercial District. We may need an overlay district. To what extent can we write an overlay district? TC: You can write an overlay district to any extent you wish. You cannot, however, infringe on people’s property rights.
6. How do we use the greenspace within the airport? TC: If referring to “housing” drawn on the map, this will not be housing as long as the airport is located there. If referring to taking over part of the airport property to revert to park, this cannot be done either. If referring to the greenspace already designated as parkspace, no equipment or anything else can be put on that property due to airport flight zones.
7. If the airport was ever closed, what would be the best use of this space? TC: This is for the residents to decides. In contrast, what if they increased flights? These are questions to raise to the residents.
8. What if TGH does leave? What happens to their property? (Comment was that it is to be returned to a trust. Still researching….) TC: It may in fact be returning to a trust, but your goal is to seek the what ifs…..Be visionaries and pose this question to the residents.
9. Can Land use from bridge to village be mixed use? TC: Yes, it can be.
10. How can we keep historic properties preserved? (Conservation district for each property?)
11. What is current percentage of commercial use vs. residential density? TC: This is something we may be able to find out. Terry will check into it.
a. Can the village support additional businesses? TC: A market study analysis would have to be done.
12. How can we enhance the pedestrian friendly uses? TC: There are many ways to make DI more pedestrian friendly. Some things that could be done include making certain streets easier to cross, connect the sidewalks, slow traffic, etc…
13. More parking needed. Both surface parking and parking garages should be considered. TC: Yes, both need to be studied and ideas presented to residents.
14. The comment was made to create height restrictions.
|
