CC_Minutes_2011_0718 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,July 18, 2011 Page 24 In follow-up to Mayor Roe's question related to urban versus flexible frontages, she used the example at Rainbow Foods at Larpenteur and Fernwood again, and the structure in the parking lot; and if and how a similar structure could meet ur- ban frontage requirements to put a building/parking lot anywhere a developer chose. Mr. Lamb noted that it was a good question of whether a non-enclosed structure would meet urban frontage requirements. Councilmember Pust suggested more thought needed to be given to that and simi- lar examples. Mayor Roe asked that this discussion be continued to a future meeting to get to remaining agenda items. Councilmember Willmus opined that before moving forward, the City Council needed to receive more definitive detail for how the pedestrian corridor would be made up, based on the comments and concerns addressed by Councilmembers Pust and McGehee; specifically looking at pedestrian corridors and build-to areas adjacent to them. Councilmember Willmus further opined that, if he were a prop- erty owner in the Twin Lakes area, he would prefer to use the zoning code and comprehensive plan as his regulating documents. Councilmember Willmus opined that the prior plan was extensively urban frontage. Councilmember Willmus noted that he does not like urban frontage and that this plan is an im- provement. Councilmember Willmus suggested that, if a plan was needed to guide development, more work was needed or the City needed to step back com- pletely. Councilmember Johnson questioned if he could share in such an option; however, he noted when meeting with the Planning Commission recently, Chair Boerigter had brought up to the City Council his concern in how the Regulating Map looked at that time and how it may restrict some developers or detract from an already tight development market. Councilmember Johnson opined that he viewed these changes as being more adaptable to different types of development scenarios, which may not be a bad thing. Councilmember Johnson concurred with Coun- cilmembers Pust and McGehee on the apparent ambiguity of connectivity and green space; and his preference to not give up anything until he saw more green components illustrated. Councilmember Johnson recognized Mr. Lamb's com- ments that green components became less important farther from the lake; how- ever, he supported a stronger green component in every development; while not- ing the need to rely on the expertise of the Parks and Recreation Commission in their oversight of development as it related to park dedication through land or fees.