2011_0822_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Attachment D development on those parcels immediately adjacent to the park and lake; then to allow more flexibility the further out the parcels went and around the outer perimeter of the Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area. Mr. Lamb noted that storm water management requirements would also serve to regulate development and flexibility. Councilmember Punt questioned if the legal obligation of the AUAR was to create more green space; and if so, was that being accomplished. Mr. Paschke advised that the AUAR talked about a number of required mitigations, such as a buffer area for the park and certain woodland species of trees; but that it didn't go so far as to define certain percentages of open space. Councilmember Punt questioned if this Plan created more buffer space that required by the AUAR. Mr. Paschke responded negatively; noting that the AUAR stood alone and judged every individual development. Councilmember Punt questioned how developers would be required to provide additional buffering; and if that would be built into the design of any adopted Plan and legal requirements to build more buffering around the lake. Mr. Paschke advised that each development would be reviewed separately, in relationship with the AUAR and other City Code requirements. Mr. Lamb advised that the development review process would be taken into consideration one site and parcel at a time; and additional buffering had been shown in Diagram I - however, he didn't characterize the Regulating Map as anything other than a development tool. 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 urban 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 Pint suggested more thought needed to be given to that and similar 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 Pint and McGehee; specifically looking at pedestrian corridors and build-to areas adjacent to them. Councilmember Willmus further opined that, if he were a property 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 improvement. Councilmember Willmus suggested that,, if a plan was needed to guide development, more work was needed or the City needed to step back completely.