|
I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />proper motion. Councilmember Hendriksen stated that it seems as if the document protet
<br />until this Council or a future Council changes it, which does not sound like much
<br />him. He stated that he would like to know the process in the situation of
<br />groundwater or mass septic failure. One concern was that the land would
<br />testing done on it. Are they now going to have testing and what is
<br />contamination. He felt that there might be additional language
<br />recommend proceeding as previously planned with the facilitator.
<br />stated that the ISTS system is in affect and will detect if there is
<br />mass septic failure.
<br />
<br />water
<br /> of
<br />
<br />Motion was withdrawn.
<br />
<br />Motion by Councilmember Kurak, seconded by
<br />Council for its review and approval the attached
<br />preserve area intended to amend the City's draft
<br />review by the City Council and approved contingently by the
<br />
<br />forward to the Met
<br /> ~sed central rural
<br /> presently under
<br />
<br /> Further discussion: Councilmember Anderson stated that she had Hendriksen
<br /> several weeks ago when he wanted .S~hing placed on the agenda she supported
<br /> Ms. Kurak with placing this item~0~';~j~n~?~,~tated that for~ document was a
<br /> sign of getting something do~e.:~th ~¢: City's~¢ ive Plan. not complete the
<br /> Comprehensive Plan process, ~t it d~b~?;show som~ ~:!~ouncilmember Hendriksen
<br /> stated that he did not have a strong 0bj~tion ~B~ langu~TProposed, ~ough ~t may be
<br /> incomplete. H,s mmn object~on ,s that the~{$hg~,;~ot be pr~ged~ral in sending different pieces
<br /> down to the Met Goundt,~ ~ile he suppd~::"~):~oncept, reco'¢~'~zing it may be incomplete, he
<br /> felt it was the wf°ng WaC{fo proceed. Coati'ember Zi~e~ stated that tbs action is a
<br /> depa~re to~ Chat ;'the CoUncil previously a~ t¢:. !~ey had not addressed the four in fo~
<br /> reqmreme~t2,:"~e other ophon would be to*; r{he central plamng ~ea out completely.
<br /> Counci* .;*U,r Hend ,e ' h*ed *h,t h, that*e p ,mng ,re, Was ,dded
<br /> to a~roW for 215-a~ d~ydo?,n~[4n~,pm,,:~;P~',ea of t~e Ci~ ~ th,t w. the *ade-off. Now
<br /> they w*~ h~ve'2~s:,q**~ae~'*~*~,d;~:.{~,~:;~h, b~t ,tin ,e~ire four ~ fo~ to *e ,o~th.
<br />
<br />.,,,,':S':72~dfi'On.ca~ed. Vo'fingllYes: Mayor Gmec, Councilmembers Kur~ ~d ~derson. Voting No:
<br /> Councflmember Z,mme~. ,~b~tamed; Counc, lmember Hendnksen.
<br />
<br /> Councilme~ Hendfi~n;;~'~ated that he abstained because he a~eed with the concept, but
<br /> disa~eed with~What was b~ing proposed.
<br />
<br /> Case ~9: ?~dopt Ordinance Amend~g Chapter 5 of the Ci~ Code Rela~g to Fees for
<br /> ~: :;'*. ,, {:: :;~ 'Impounding Dogs
<br />
<br /> City;Administrator No,an stated that on September 11, 2001, the Ci~ Council introduced an
<br /> ordnance amending Chapter 5 of the Ci~ Code, deleting any reference to fees with regard to
<br />
<br /> Ci~ Counc$September 25, 2001
<br /> Page 27 of 31
<br />
<br />-41-
<br />
<br />
<br />
|