Laserfiche WebLink
Regular City Council Meeting <br /> Monday,April 21, 2014 <br /> Page 15 <br /> Councilmember McGehee expressed appreciation for the work done by the appli- <br /> cant in platting; and was personally sorry that the City didn't have an existing tool <br /> to make this work for the applicant more quickly. However, Councilmember <br /> McGehee stated that she couldn't agree to LDR-2, and suggested staff should <br /> have polled the City Council before the application got this far. Councilmember <br /> McGehee questioned Mr. Johnson on what would happen if the original platting <br /> could be made to work and the process was expedited for the property to remain <br /> LDR-1. <br /> Mr. Johnson expressed the applicant's willingness to apply covenants or deed re- <br /> strictions stating that no duplexes or townhomes could be built on the parcels, on- <br /> ly single-family homes. <br /> At the request of Councilmember McGehee, City Attorney Gaughan advised that <br /> deed restrictions would run with the land; however, he noted that he was not cer- <br /> tain the City could condition approval on that restriction. <br /> If the City Council decided to table action tonight, Mayor Roe advised that they <br /> would need confirmation on that by the City Attorney. <br /> Councilmember Willmus expressed concern that if a majority of property owners <br /> got together, they could void a covenant; and while deed restrictions carried more <br /> weight, it may become more troublesome. Councilmember Willmus opined that <br /> he found this discussion regarding rezoning issues, while having this plat in front <br /> of the body, troubling as well; and suggested that the City Council look at it in the <br /> context of rezoning with all that entails and whether they were comfortable in do- <br /> ing so. Drawing from his personal conclusions, Councilmember Willmus state <br /> that he was not happy doing so; and if the City Council were to take action on this <br /> tonight, he would need to vote in opposition. If that was the majority rule, Coun- <br /> cilmember Willmus noted that the applicant could return with a planned unit de- <br /> velopment (PUD) process, which he could support as that provided an available <br /> tool that would protect the City from the potential of having two-family attached <br /> or detached homes. <br /> City Planner Thomas Paschke opined that, when talking about tools, the recently <br /> updated Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code provided that available tool in the <br /> revisions and allowances made. Mr. Paschke further opined that, absent having <br /> LDR-2 zoning, the PUD did nothing, as LDR-2 zoning would need to be elimi- <br /> nated and a PUD process created, but predicated on something allowing the City <br /> Council to do so, for a unique development design. <br /> Mayor Roe recognize that tools were available, but he was unsure LDR-2 was ac- <br /> tually in the toolbox; and in his review of the Subdivision Code and lot standards, <br />