CC_Minutes_2014_0127 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,January 27, 2014 Page 31 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Definition AND CMU (Zoning) Statement of Pur- pose Discussion included staff's interpretation of a land use mix of 25-50% housing as being unrealistic under current market circumstances; definition of "civic" and "institutional;" and staff's recommendation to keep the Comprehensive Plan land use definitions broad, with specificity addressed under the Zoning Code tables of use and in direct correlation and consistent with each other. At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Paschke clarified that by having the broad categories with the zoning ordinance telling the specific uses within those broad categories, it would avoid ambiguities currently found. At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Paschke confirmed that the Twin Lakes Redevelopment was currently the only CMU designation in Roseville. Addressing concerns expressed by Councilmember McGehee, Mayor Roe clari- fied that the zoning code would provide the appropriate place to specifically per- mit or not permit uses. Recognizing Councilmember McGehee's concerns and example of the existing Park & Ride facility, Councilmember Willmus opined that more thought was needed as he considered this intriguing situation; however, he further opined that he liked the proposed revisions outlined by staff better than the current version; but agreed with Councilmember McGehee's question of whether it went far enough. Mr. Paschke responded, in accordance with recent discussions with City Attorney Gaughan, that it was typical in the planning field that land use definitions not be too specific,but made broader, with the zoning ordinance bringing that specificity into play, as it was difficult to enforce those definitions under the Comprehensive Plan alone. Councilmember Laliberte recognized staff's attempt to match up the table with the proposed language amendments; and opined that she found these suggested amendments to accomplish that goal, and understood why taking out the specifici- ty took the burden off those being last to the area being forced to develop in a cer- tain way. In response to Councilmember Laliberte's question in how to get zoning to com- ply, Mr. Paschke responded that this was included as the next part of the defini- tion, in taking those land use aspirations and putting them into law in the zoning section. Councilmember McGehee asked that the two be accomplished with a parallel path to allow for meaningful discussion of what was included under this broad brush.