Laserfiche WebLink
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION <br />DRAFT <br /> 2 <br />including financials since he’s viewed it. Further this land is designated mixed use. 45 <br />Change in the economy (interest rates) is not a good enough reason for him to change the 46 <br />use. The developer noted that they were prepared to drop the contract based on their 47 <br />inability to produce the commercial element; the option is what could move things 48 <br />forward. 49 <br /> 50 <br />Councilmember Stoesz asked about construction scheduling in order to understand how 51 <br />area residents could be impacted – could an amendment mean it’s possible to have 52 <br />construction for 48 months? 53 <br /> 54 <br />Mayor Rafferty remarked that the property is valuable. He has spoken about his ideas for 55 <br />the property in the past, especially liking a row house concept. He doesn’t mind the 56 <br />concept of discussing ways to move forward but he believes the commercial has to be 57 <br />included eventually. The developer spoke to seeing development follow development in 58 <br />other areas and that more rooftops bring the commercial. 59 <br /> 60 <br />Councilmember Lyden remarked that the City’s investment in The Rookery does mean 61 <br />that some land has to remain reserved for expansion of those facilities. 62 <br /> 63 <br />The council concurred that staff will set up an EDA meeting for the next week to consider 64 <br />an amendment. The developers indicated that they are open to discussing terms. 65 <br />2. Zoning Ordinance Update – Kendra Lindahl and Kevin Shay, Landform 66 <br />(consultants to the project) reviewed a presentation that included information on the 67 <br />following: 68 <br />- City’s Comprehensive Plan adopted and this is next step to update; 69 <br />- Review of past consideration of the Planning and Zoning Board (P&Z) and City 70 <br />Council; P&Z has been reviewing and holding hearings on the amendments for more than 71 <br />a year and is recommending removal of the FUD district from the map; 72 <br />- Implementation strategies from the Comp Plan; 73 <br />- Development doesn’t happen due to adoption of map changes, but rather it is a 74 <br />precursor to prepare for development; 75 <br />- Extension of sewer and water are indicated; 76 <br />- Parcels proposed to be rezoned as part of this process (types of rezonings and 77 <br />parcels impacted were reviewed); 78 <br />- Review of Future Urban Development (FUD) district intent; would not change 79 <br />uses but would change minimum lot size; 80 <br />- Future council action requested. 81