CC_Minutes_2014_0220 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Special City Council Meeting Thursday, February 20, 2014 Page 17 opined that, absent those additional discussions, he would fall back on the option to update the zoning code and comprehensive plan and not be overly prescriptive with the exception of a few minor tweaks. Councilmember McGehee concurred with Councilmember Willmus, opining that she would prefer not to be too prescriptive. However, Councilmember McGehee opined that she was no fan of the regulating map, and would like to consider re- turning the Planned Unit Development (PUD) to the City's tool box, not that this is a PUD,but having available for appropriate applications. Councilmember Etten expressed preference to not be too specific to one business but to look to continue if a building was vacant and the owner wanted to redevel- op it, at which time the City may be able to assist in clearing the land. Coun- cilmember Etten questioned what was needed to complete Twin Lakes Parkway, as requested by property owners and developers, suggesting that it be done. Without memorizing current zoning permitted zoning uses and not having that in- formation available, Councilmember Etten questioned the best option, opining that this is more prescriptive than he was willing to accept at this time without further reviewing the current table of uses, which was subsequently displayed by Mr. Paschke. Councilmember Etten advised that he was not against the two col- ored map, recognizing that the current map north of Terrace Drive and east of Fairview Avenue did not include mixed us, even through property owners would like that flexibility for the open market to allow them to make positive moved. Therefore, with minor tweaks, Councilmember Etten suggested looking at the cur- rent CMU, driven by the fact that it was easier to amend that versus having anoth- er discussion on how to get to the same goal. Mayor Roe opined that two versus five columns would be much easier. Mr. Paschke suggested only one column, not a separate subdistrict CMU-1, in an effort to be more restrictive of uses adjacent to the park on the PIK terminal par- cels,but only serving to eliminate opportunities currently available. Mayor Roe noted that what was being described and the purpose outlined on the map was basically CMU-2 and all others were CMU-1, with things not allowed or only allowed at a certain scale. Mayor Roe suggested that may be the next step, to determine if that was the right delineation and any differences between the two. Mayor Roe opined that they were identical with few exceptions in the purple area on the map, located near single-family residential or the park; with the two lists looking the same except for that. Councilmember Willmus opined that in essence it was creating a buffer around the park, which he was fine with, but not the entire area currently shaded as pur- ple, bur roughly the area south of Iona Lane and blending with the other larger geographical area.