Minutes - Council - 09/13/2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

the developer. Council passed a motion to delay the decision on the request for rezoning until their regular meeting on August 22, 2000. The purpose of the delay was to provide the City Council an opportunity to meet with the legal counsel representing the City in the legal matter. On August 22, 2000, the City Council directed City staff to amend the Findings of Fact presented by the Planning Commission to support denial of the request for rezoning. City Attorney Goodrich stated that the findings of fact were drafted in the negative to the applicant and advised the Council to review each of the findings starting with #8. Councilmember Hendriksen stated that City Code requires that a sketch plan be included with a rezoning request and inquired as to what impact does the content of the sketch plan have on the decision as to whether or not the property will be rezoned. City Attorney Goodrich replied that legally the'sketch plan is not significant because approval of the concept plan is not criteria for the rezoning, but after the property is rezoned then the concept plan as well as the site plan becomes significant. The sketch plan is informational at most. Councilmember Hendriksen stated that in any zoning district there is a range of uses and inquired if the intent of the concept plan is to identify where in that range the builder is proposing the development. City Attorney Goodrich replied that the sketch plan is a planning guide. Councilmember Hendriksen inquired if the sketch plan that was presented fell at one end of the range of credible uses and the City felt it should occur at the other end would it be a relevant to include that in the findings of fact. City Attorney Goodrich replied that that is not criteria used for rezoning. Councilmember Hendriksen stated that the 1993 Comprehensive Plan amendment allows for development of property within the MUSA on one-acre lots which is not being proposed by the developer, and inquired if it should be included as one of the findings of fact that the 1993 Comprehensive Plan amendment does permit zoning which is consistent to adjoining properties. City Attorney Goodrich replied that it would be reasonable to include that fact as part of the findings of fact. Motion by Councilmember Hendriksen, seconded by Councilmember Connolly, to add #10b to the findings of fact stating "That the 1993 Comprehensive Plan amendment allowed development on one acre lots. Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Gamec, Councilmembers Hendriksen, Connolly, Anderson, and Zimmerman. Voting No: None. City Council/September 13, 2000 Page 8 of 19