Laserfiche WebLink
April 9, 1979 Page 3 <br />MSP (McCarty- Hodges) to approve the April 9, 1979 bills for pay- <br />ment. 5 ayes <br />PUBLIC HEARING - CAPETZ REZONING <br />Mayor McCarty explained that the applicant has withdrawn his request <br />for development. Acting Administrator Anderson further explained that <br />the fees the applicant had paid were not refundable. <br />Mayor McCarty stated that while they waited for the next public hearing, <br />he would like to discuss the revisions he had made to the proposed <br />agreements in principle, which the Council had discussed at the last <br />agenda session, and get Council approval. <br />Councilmember Ziebarth stated that the original intent was a set of <br />goals or principles which would indicate to the City the direction of <br />movement for SDM funds and approaches to storm water drainage. He <br />stated that he did not envision the goals of a City council being <br />framed in an ordinance, as those goals would change with councils, <br />and that he did not want future elected officials being bound by the <br />present Council's goals. <br />Councilmember Rowley added that she also did not want the goals made <br />concrete because they would bind each future Council to them. <br />Mayor McCarty replied that he would be willing to eliminate the 4/5 <br />vote, which would then not require it to be in ordinance form. <br />Attorney Meyers added that the Council could establish the goals as <br />a policy. <br />Councilmember Ziebarth stated that he felt the Council could develop <br />a policy from the Mayor's outline. Councilmember Hodges agreed that <br />what the Mayor had outlined could be put into policy form. <br />Councilmember Rowley stated that she agreed it had the makings of a <br />policy but recommended waiting until the Council received a report <br />the Building and Zoning Official was working on, addressing that <br />situation, and then work together on it. <br />Councilmember Forslund stated that she would like Attorney Meyer's <br />opinion on what else should be included. Attorney Meyers replied that <br />they should address new development, i.e., storm water problems, and <br />lay out guidelines for developers on what is acceptable to the City. <br />He added that if an applicant comes in and sees he cannot build and <br />meet the City standards, Staff should review the applicant's <br />engineering study. <br />Councilmember Ziebarth stated that he was concerned with developers who <br />own large sections of commercial property deciding to go with on -site <br />retention, as he did not want holding ponds with each development. <br />He further recommended that until they could come up with deeper <br />discussions on what they are facing, they sit down at an agenda session <br />and discuss all the ramifications and put their recommendations into <br />policy form, stating clearly the way the Council is going to operate. <br />