02/24/2003 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 24, 2003 APROVED 1 2 Mayor Bergeson stated he believes the intersection language added by Councilmember Carlson is 3 intended to mean only intersections, but Item g. talks about interchanges. Councilmember Carlson 4 stated that she is actually talking about interchanges being intersections as well. She indicated her 5 point is that when a development changes the LOS of an intersection, the developer should be 6 charged, whether right then or with money set aside for improvements at a later date, so the cost is not 7 impacting the taxpaying citizens. 8 9 City Planner Smyser stated that if they are talking about interchanges in this case, the whole thing 10 falls apart. Councilmember Carlson indicated she was open to other suggestions for cost 11 participation. 12 13 City Planner Smyser indicated that Item g. says, in part, 14 The plan also must examine financing options, including project contribution and cost 15 sharing among other properties that contribute to traffic at the interchange. 16 He indicated that language is there to address who will pay. He stated that since we do not know, the 17 plan would have to lay it out. 18 19 Councilmember Carlson stated she understands that, but she is considering an intersection as any 20 place where two roads intersect. She stated what is missing in Item g. is how to set money aside for 21 the improvements. City Planner Smyser stated it would be part of the study. He indicated we do not • 22 know now, because there are so many variables out of the City's control. He agreed it was a bad 23 situation to be in, but it is the situation nonetheless. He stated that anything specific will not work. 24 25 Mayor Bergeson indicated that in Item g., the first sentence is clear. He stated that whatever 26 requirements the Council decides to put on the interchange needs to be put in Item g. or subsequent 27 items, since it says all the above items do not apply to interchanges and Item g. applies only to 28 interchanges. 29 30 Councilmember Reinert stated he keeps reading this, and what it says to him is that when developers 31 come in, the Council will look at the intersection, but there is no action language that solves or gets 32 the City any closer to action. He indicated it is obvious Staff does not have any language that will 33 make him more comfortable. He stated his concern is if a developer comes in, the Council will look 34 at it. Then another comes in, and the Council will look at it again, with no action. He indicated that 35 in previous meetings City Planner Smyser had stated that improvements do not get done until the 36 need arises, so what this is saying is we will allow development until the situation gets so bad that the 37 state will look at it. City Planner Smyser stated that unfortunately, that is the way it works. 38 39 Councilmember Reinert indicated that in that case, it seems like the Council is just going through the 40 motions. He stated there is a paragraph stating we can look at the impact, but if the outcome is the 41 same no matter what the impact is, they are wasting their time. He indicated he was getting frustrated 42 that maybe they are kidding themselves, because he does not see anything except words that say we •43 will look at it. He asked the Council to look at this honestly, and determine if there was anything they 44 could do about it or not. 45 14