03/13/2002 P&Z Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

• • • Planning & Zoning Board January 9, 2002 Page 28 Mr. Rafferty questioned how the applicant would be affected by the tabling of the request or a delay in the City's decision, which at this point he did not believe would be favorable from the Planning and Zoning Board. He acknowledged that even if the Board recommended denial, the development will be reviewed by the City Council, however, he believed the Council will have the same difficulty in making a decision. He noted if this was the case and the Council denied the request, the developer would have to wait one year before reapplying. Mr. Peake stated he would be pleased to continue working with the City toward an alternative that will work. However, he noted the applicant was under the eminent threat of a building moratorium, which would not allow the luxury of having this matter tabled. He believed there may be an opportunity for the City Council to waive the moratorium for this proposed development in order to further pursue alternatives that work for Mr. Vaughan, the City and the neighbors. He stated if the develop " n v. ► ld not be affected by the moratorium he would be willing to accept the proposal Ong to d. Mr. Rafferty noted the moratorium will only be in pla or .ns and he was not certain the proposal would be approved as submitt damaging to the applicant than the moratorium. Mr. Peake stated the consideration of this cooperation and indicated Mr. Vaughan has not been rigid in his expectations. eyed would be more al mu .e done in the spirit of ery willing to work with the City and mpendi + + directly conflicts with the settlement he ity could cooperate with Mr. Vaughan and con ued development of the island. He felt that Mr. ortunity to continue working with the Planning and s tovtermine whether there were some reasonable solutions. onstraints. Mr. Peake felt that the im because he did preclude him from requ Vaughan should be Zoning Board and However, there are tim Mr. Rafferty no &' oratorium would apply to any preliminary plats not approved by the effective date nd he questioned whether the applicant was attempting to move too quickly with this ' - velopment because of the pending moratorium. Mr. Peake believed that the impending moratorium was forcing both the Planning and Zoning Board's hands as well as Mr. Vaughan's hands. He expressed his willingness to continue working with the Board, the City Council and staff in attempting to design a development that will work. However, if Mr. Vaughan is precluded from doing this by the moratorium then he felt the City is not accomplishing its job and Mr. Vaughan can not obtain that which he has a constitutional right to. Mr. Rafferty stated the Planning and Zoning Board is not required to make a decision based solely on the possibility of a future moratorium. Mr. Corson made a MOTION to recommend denial of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment requesest for the Pheasant Hills 12th Addition to change the guided use of