02/10/2003 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 10, 2003 APPROVED 1 • 2 City Planner Smyser indicated they talked about it a lot, and this is the best they could come up with 3 at the time. He added it is a difficult issue, putting control over something they have no control to fix. 4 He stated it is a tough situation with no easy way out. 5 6 Councilmember Reinert asked for a comment from Staff, if the ordinance is passed without item g., 7 what effects on the interchange there would be. He asked for their opinion whether to pass without 8 item g. or pull back to a work session. 9 10 Community Development Director Grochala indicated that without item g. in there, item d. says 'the 11 existing LOS must be D or better for any street providing access to the subdivision. If the existing 12 level of service is E or F, the subdivision developer must provide, as part of the proposed project, 13 improvements needed to ensure a level of service D or better.' He stated that is what they would fall 14 back to, meaning if you are developing adjacent to the interchange, you would be responsible for 15 brining the LOS to a D or not developing. 16 17 Councilmember Reinert asked Community Development Director Grochala to define adjacent. 18 Community Development Director Grochala indicated it would mean Lake Drive or Main Street. 19 Councilmember Reinert asked if adjacent is actually abutting. Community Development Director 20 Grochala indicated adjacent was his word, but it actually says providing access, which for the Town 21 Center would be Lake Drive. 22 23 Councilmember Reinert clarified that it is not the street adjacent to the subdivision. Community • 24 Development Director Grochala indicated it was not adjacent, but the street providing access to the 25 subdivision. He stated this case is unique. In most subdivisions you have a street which allows 26 access to the subdivision, but this is a greater area. 27 28 Councilmember O'Donnell indicated he recommends tabling the second reading and bringing it back 29 to a work session to iron out. 30 31 Mayor Bergeson confirmed they were okay with the timing. Councilmember Reinert indicated the 32 concern is the moratorium expires February 20, so the exposure is anything that may come in on 33 Monday, February 24. City Planner Smyser indicated the ordinance does not take effect for five 34 weeks. Community Development Director Grochala indicated it would be okay to push it out two 35 weeks. 36 37 Councilmember Carlson indicated that if you look at the draft from September 4, 2002, it appears to 38 be a much stronger ordinance than it is now. She read several paragraphs relating to the LOS. She 39 indicated that the draft required LOS C or better, and there was more teeth to have the developer pay 40 for improvements. She stated she feels they lost some of the ability to say no around an intersection 41 if it does not meet a level of service. She indicated instead of four levels, there are now eight, and the 42 minimum has gone from C to D. She feels it is a weaker ordinance. 43 44 City Planner Smyser reminded the Council there has been a lot of discussion since that draft. 45 46 Mayor Bergeson indicated he would support Councilmember O'Donnell's recommendation to spend • 47 more time on this so they do not pass something the did not intend to pass. He stated since there were 48 different opinions on implications of passing without item g., if they are still within their timeframe 21