Agenda - Council - 02/12/2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Motion by Councilmember Hendriksen, seconded by Councilmember Anderson, to complete an EAW in accordance with the options presented by the City Attorney. Further discussion: Councilmember Kurak inquired as to what an EAW meant. City Attorney Goodrich explained that once an EAW is ordered the City cannot take any more action on the proposal. Secondly they will look at all environmental concerns and make a recommendation whether or not the development should proceed as planned based on those environmental concerns. Principal Planner Trudgeon explained that the' agency will fill out a work sheet and once that is done the Council reviews the document and makes a determination if further review is needed and order an EIS. If no further review is needed then the process stops. Councilmember Kurak stated that she would prefer to work with the developer on scaling down the size of the development rather than holding it up. She did not want the development to be stopped because she thought that would be bad for the City. She stated that she did not understand what the emergency was to have the EAW completed until it is determined how much density will be placed on the site. Councilmember Kurak did not think that it made sense to stop the process when there is already a petition by.the residents to complete the EAW.. Mayor Gamec stated that the property is going to be developed and will be done soon. When he sees a plan that is reasonable, and the citizens-have submitted the EAW petition, then he felt that the City should continue to work with the developer. Councilmember Anderson inquired if there was an agreement amongst the Council that all streets should be built to City standards. Councilmember Hendriksen replied that that is what is required by City Code and the City has made three exceptions to that requirement which the City has had many problems with. Councilmember Anderson stated that she thought developing the site with a PUD was the correct way to develop. the site. Councilmember Hendriksen stated that ultimately it might be developed under a PUD, but, as presented, he does not support the development. Mayor Gamec stated that the Council had a work session with the developer and comments were made that it was a good development and now the comments are being reversed. Councilmember Hendriksen stated that one of the reasons he wrestled with the development is because there are positive aspects, but there are also aspects that he does not like and he trusts that the development will improve by going through an extra cycle. The proposed density exceeds the March 2001 Comprehensive Plan and it obviously exceeds any plan he would have approved. He has never been in favor of private streets and does not believe the 20 percent ot' common area meets the intent' of the 'ordinance. He also stated that there are a number of comments in the Findings of Fact that he feels are dishonest. City Attorney Goodrich reviewed the EAW process. Mr. Black stated that he is not against the EAW being done, but felt that they should wait for the EQB to make their comments. His concern with the EAW is that he is hearing very fundamental issues that would require them to redevelop the plan. If an EAW is completed it would be done off a plan that they would not be approved by the Council. He expressed disappointment over the comments he heard from the Council because he did have approval from the Planning Commission and has worked closely with the staff. To require an EAW is a step in the wrong direction. He requested that he be allowed to come back with a revised plan for Council consideration. Councilmember Kurak stated that the developer should be given an opportunity to revise the plan instead of stopping the process and then at that time they can consider an EAW if it is still a concern. Mr. Black stated that a total development, with 5 units per acre is not a dense development. He stated that he has spent a considerable amount of time with the Parks Department and was prepared to present a park plan, which City Council/June 26, 2001 Page 16 of 28 -167-