12/17/2000 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

12-17-01 Page 22 Mayor Rinker said let me try to make myself clear. As I listen to some of the comments, including the ones that I am making, I feel that we are blurring the distinction between something procedural and something substantive. The fact of the matter is, and Mr. Diemert, I am going to ask you this question--my understanding of our Charter and ordinances that it is not limited to something being introduced through Planning and Zoning. How the ordinance gets identified can happen in more than one way. A lot of times we will get a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission for Council to adopt or identify a piece of legislation. This is different from that. But otherwise, all that Council is being asked to do is identify it and give it a tag--not to approve it, not to pass judgment on it, simply to give it an identity. I think that the concerns that Mr. Marquardt have expressed, the concerns that Mr. Ilacqua have expressed, have the same opportunity to be heard as this moves through the system. I think that we have to recognize a responsibility when people present these things to try to give them an opportunity to be heard. If it turns out that by February when Council would then be called upon to vote upon the ordinance and Council is not ready to do it, Council controls that. So, you are not predetermining--you are not prejudging--what you are doing is you do have the power to give this an opportunity to move off of square one. Pure and simple. If you have those concerns then I would certainly expect that the discussion ensue on that. So, it's an opportunity to have that discussion rather than to torpedo it now, let it stop, and then say you come back whenever. I think that that's unnecessary. I just feel just give this guy an opportunity to move forward and then let people have a chance to deal with it. If by February it doesn't look good, then everyone can say we gave it a shot and either you postpone it or you don't do anything more with it. Mr. Ilacqua said if I may, I don't feel that my stance is torpedoing the issue or not allowing you to move forward. I think that we are doing more than identifying this and giving it a tag. We are self- imposing a potential deadline or time limit in May and considering perhaps what I feel may be one of the crucial issues of the future of this Village--which is zoning--and the change from residential to commercial. I think the ramifications go far beyond Wilson Mills; we have residential properties up and down S.O.M. I don't see a business hardship in terms of delaying the project 6 months out to November. I don't see how this is--this is off square one tonight and it is identified and I appreciate you coming in. I think this will obviously be discussed. I am just uncomfortable in moving forward with the reading... Mr. Schiemann said as Bruce just said, if that same uncomfortability is there in February, we go a different tack. All we are really doing is setting the ship for sail tonight. If we get to the February meeting when it has to be approved and we are still uncomfortable, and we don't have a Development Agreement to protect the rest of the Village, which certainly I am agreeable to, this is my community too. If we don't have a Development Agreement which structures and protects other areas from going commercial that we don't want to go commercial, if we don't have those things in place, then I am probably with you guys and protect our community first. Tonight, I am not asking you to do that. Tonight, we are just setting the ship down the road; we are just setting the ship a sail. Council President Marquardt asked if there were any other comments. There were no comments.