Laserfiche WebLink
Regular City Council Meeting <br /> Monday, May 4,2015 <br /> Page 34 <br /> Despite efforts by the City Council to address significant geographical differences <br /> between Subareas, Councilmember Willmus opined the multi-family use may be <br /> appropriate in Subarea A along County Road C, while it may be appropriate in <br /> Subarea A north of Terrace. Councilmember Willmus further opined that, as <br /> mentioned by Councilmember Etten, future discussion needs to focus on the lake <br /> and existing residential areas and in reviewing the overall context. <br /> Specific and in response to the MDR petition, Mayor Roe recognized the large <br /> number of residents in the immediate neighborhood, but also noted the need for <br /> the City Council to address responses received from the broader community as <br /> well and weight their concerns as well in the decision-making process. From his <br /> personal perspective, Mayor Roe advised that moving to MDR for the entire strip <br /> north of Terrace Drive was far too restrictive of uses even though such uses may <br /> be acceptable to the neighbors. <br /> Mayor Roe agreed that the City needed to use care in addressing adjacency issues <br /> for single-family homes and the lake, which remained a concern throughout the <br /> City, and admitted that planning and land use decisions made in the past didn't <br /> always end up right. Mayor Roe used the Har Mar Mall project as one of those <br /> examples, and the ongoing code enforcement issues in that area, recognizing the <br /> need to be conscious of that moving forward. Mayor Roe opined that the way to <br /> accomplish that is through using specific restrictions in the zoning code versus <br /> agreements;, and advised that he'll be looking to that going forward. Mayor Roe <br /> reiterated his concern that he found the MDR citizen petition too restrictive and <br /> opined he found other uses should be on the table, making it more appropriate for <br /> CMU zoning there. <br /> Based on his personal opinion, and as stated previously by Councilmember <br /> McGehee, Mayor Roe opined that when going through these processes as a repre- <br /> sentative democracy, there will seldom if ever be 100% satisfaction; but the goal <br /> was to get the best possible solution for what was believed to be the best for the <br /> community moving forward. Under that scenario, Mayor Roe opined that the <br /> City Council and staff had made a good effort to accommodate public concerns, <br /> and would continue to listen and look at ways and conditions (e.g. buffer zones <br /> and possibly change initial designations). Mayor Roe reminded everyone that this <br /> was only a first draft, and not the end of the discussion; and while not satisfying <br /> all, the City Council was doing its best and didn't want to shut anyone out of the <br /> process. <br /> At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, and at the direction of Mayor Roe, <br /> Mr. Bilotta advised that future height issue discussions may alleviate some con- <br /> cerns, especially around lakes and single-family residences. Mr. Bilotta stated <br /> that staff would return with options for how that may be addressed, suggesting as <br />