City Council Minutes 2018 04 03 - Laserfiche WebLink

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

City Council Meeting Minutes Apnl 3, 2018 Page 5 of 8 now the $9 95M asking price This is a favorable rate of return in a market we are saying is floundering. There is a disconnect in this information and what we are talking about. We should talk to the owner and get them to be realistic to get the property moving. It seems they are so far out of reality of what the market will bear. We need to do something and we should market our community to attract retail but that is hard to do given the expectations of the owner. The responsibility is with the property owner and the community does not have to take the burden. If we do change the land uses we are taking a risk of changing the property from a neutral revenue property to one that is a city cost center. If we are considering alternatives we should find things that are favorable to the community. Councilmember Loo stated when she sees what is interesting in the metro area in retail it is usually high density and urban and she is not sure that is what Louisville residents want. We probably won't know if people like a change until it is built The problem is we don't own the land and it is a $10M piece of property so there is not a lot we can do about it. Making it a public space would cost the City a lot of money. At this point in time, there is not the political sentiment to densify that piece of property and I think that is what a study will tell us we should do. We don't have the population and demographics to get regional retail. She stated she doesn't want another study to tell us that retail follows rooftops If there is no political will for more residential density, a study is a waste of money. Mayor Muckle agreed with Councilmember Stolzmann that it is not the City's problem to redevelop a private owner's business. However, our interest is in the fact that what happens there affects the entire corridor and we have a broader interest in the impact on the community. He stated he would support other uses if they make sense and he won't support a market study that just gives us the same information that we need residential to get retail, but if we can guide it with principles like Councilmember Maloney stated and we ask for an analysis of what kinds of new retail trends might work in a community of our size, we may move this forward for us. We have tried to get the current and previous owner to do a market hall without success to date and we would support if it would work in that space. Councilmember Leh agreed the property is important to the larger picture and that is important to take into consideration. We need to take into account the new housing in Supenor. He thinks a study can help us to figure out a strategy for that area. It seems the role of government is to set the table; but we don't know for what we are setting the table at this point. A study will help tell us that Councilmember Keany stated that without owning the property it is not up to us. We need to be more open to new ideas but we also know the comp plan limits what can happen there. This area doesn't need to be residential but could it be a mixed use area if the comp plan was changed. He added he is conflicted on the study as we don't own the property and if we aren't willing to change the comp plan uses it doesn't matter.