HomeMy WebLinkAboutgr00090_000050_pg089April 9, 1979 Page 3
MSP (McCarty- Hodges) to approve the April 9, 1979 bills for pay-
ment. 5 ayes
PUBLIC HEARING - CAPETZ REZONING
Mayor McCarty explained that the applicant has withdrawn his request
for development. Acting Administrator Anderson further explained that
the fees the applicant had paid were not refundable.
Mayor McCarty stated that while they waited for the next public hearing,
he would like to discuss the revisions he had made to the proposed
agreements in principle, which the Council had discussed at the last
agenda session, and get Council approval.
Councilmember Ziebarth stated that the original intent was a set of
goals or principles which would indicate to the City the direction of
movement for SDM funds and approaches to storm water drainage. He
stated that he did not envision the goals of a City council being
framed in an ordinance, as those goals would change with councils,
and that he did not want future elected officials being bound by the
present Council's goals.
Councilmember Rowley added that she also did not want the goals made
concrete because they would bind each future Council to them.
Mayor McCarty replied that he would be willing to eliminate the 4/5
vote, which would then not require it to be in ordinance form.
Attorney Meyers added that the Council could establish the goals as
a policy.
Councilmember Ziebarth stated that he felt the Council could develop
a policy from the Mayor's outline. Councilmember Hodges agreed that
what the Mayor had outlined could be put into policy form.
Councilmember Rowley stated that she agreed it had the makings of a
policy but recommended waiting until the Council received a report
the Building and Zoning Official was working on, addressing that
situation, and then work together on it.
Councilmember Forslund stated that she would like Attorney Meyer's
opinion on what else should be included. Attorney Meyers replied that
they should address new development, i.e., storm water problems, and
lay out guidelines for developers on what is acceptable to the City.
He added that if an applicant comes in and sees he cannot build and
meet the City standards, Staff should review the applicant's
engineering study.
Councilmember Ziebarth stated that he was concerned with developers who
own large sections of commercial property deciding to go with on -site
retention, as he did not want holding ponds with each development.
He further recommended that until they could come up with deeper
discussions on what they are facing, they sit down at an agenda session
and discuss all the ramifications and put their recommendations into
policy form, stating clearly the way the Council is going to operate.