CC_Minutes_2015_0323 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, March 23,2015 Page 19 ten creating a large gap between the two. If the market was able to characterize that and facilitate more deals by closing that gap, Mr. Bilotta opined that the City would not be duplicating the private sector but providing an ability for review of the realities. Mr. Bilotta noted that the most problematic and largest beneficiaries of such a study would be the former Dorso, PIK and similar sites. Councilmember McGehee recalled during the work by the City's Public Works and Engineering Departments in cleaning up the PIK site, contamination had been found much worse than anticipated, significantly increasing the money needed to move the contaminated material off-site. Councilmember McGehee opined that this was not something that would escape other potential buyers in this area; and sited several developments that had been lost to other communities due to not having the properties shovel-ready. Councilmember McGehee further opined that this was an important piece of developing this area, and was not intended to serve as a handout for current property owners,but would ultimately serve to benefit the entire community. At the request of Mayor Roe, Mr. Bilotta confirmed that funding for the consult- ant would come from the TIF Hazardous Substance Subdistrict not currently be- ing used; and $10,000 would not significantly impact that fund. Etten moved, Willmus seconded, directing staff to create request for proposals seeking a strategic brownfields consultant for the Twin Lakes Redevelopment Ar- ea. Roll Call Ayes: Laliberte, McGehee, Willmus, Etten, and Roe. Nays: None. Mr. Bilotta asked the City Council to provide direction on how much public input they wanted to incorporate into these eight areas providing further direction, with Mayor Roe thanking Mr. Bilotta for the reminder to include that as applicable during this discussion process. Subareas indicating little support for residential uses (Subareas 2, 5, 6, or 7) and whether rezoning was indicated for a more traditional commercial versus a mixed use district. Mayor Roe opined that, depending on the subarea, further consideration was needed for actual uses not allowed in other commercial districts and applicable setbacks, which may agree with survey results, or indicate the need to look at more defined CMU subdistricts. Whatever the consensus, Mayor Roe opined hat zoning changes, if and when needed, could and should be applied based on uses in reality. While supporting further discussion, Mayor Roe stated he preferred to leave the option for more commercial-oriented CMU zoning as an alternate choice in portions of some of those subareas.