Minutes - Council - 03/30/1999 - Special

Home

Further discussion: It was stated that this is not giving these people the benefit of the protections. Ms. Sherman stated there is a provision that if it's residential, no PUD is required. However, the City Council can say that it be consistent. Mr. Goodrich stated that the ordinance has to be conforming with the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Sherman stated the policy is in the comp plan. The process of the comp plan is this is the policy and guidelines. The next step is to go through the ordinances, etc. We envision we have new zoning districts and maybe some more restrictive regulations. She stated she believes that the policies in here if this plan is implemented the way it is intended, gives the City Council the ability to say that this is not consistent. Councilmember Hendriksen stated that policies must be consistent with the Comp Plan. The zoning is to flag the areas that will have these protections we are talking about. If you are writing policies more restrictive than zoning, then you may have to go to court and they can win. Councihnember Anderson, referring to Chapter 5, page 17, asked what if you strike "projects containing only single family housing would not be subject to a PUD. Would that solve the problem? Ms. Sherman stated she did not know if you want to require a PUD if you do not need it. She added that she could not really think of any repercussions at this time. Councilmember Zimmerman stated that zoning is a powerful tool. If it's zoned something, your policies are secondary to the zoning. Mayor Gamec inserted that policy and zoning should be consistent. Councilmember Haas Steffen stated that she did not feet that's what we are being told. In all cases when we want to have a transitional situation, we have to have a special zoning area. Mr. Goodrich stated that this is the master plan from which flows zoning and policy, policy cannot be adopted with the comp plan. Someone may challenge us in court but the zoning is a day to day thing - the practical aspects of the plan. We try to have it all conform. Zoning is where the law will look. Councihnember Haas Steffen asked if City Council gets to have the final word in zoning to which Mr. Goodrich replied yes. Councilmember Haas Steffen stated that we have a means to say to the Planning Commission that you did not take into consideration. Councilmember Hendriksen noted that we can veto this, but it could be overturned in court. Mr. Goodrich stated that the court will ask whether we got authority for this. Similar to the Charter, it is broad. Then we will ask to draft an ordinance to take care of specifics. Councilmember Hendriksen stated we have something here called urban rural transition where we have more restrictive zoning - melding density with existing rural. We have this in some areas of the City, but then in other areas there is something different. Why did we decide it's not necessary here? Councilmember Anderson stated there might be some folks who would like to have nice condominiums or townhouses down by the river. Councilmember Hendriksen responded but some houses on the river do not feel they would like condos next to them. Let's pool the people on Bowers Drive or Alpaca and see how they feel about not having this protection. Councilmember Haas Steffen stated she feels the language will take care of it. It gets done in the ordinances with this special consideration; it will be back at us. We are saying there is protection in here and ordinance will take care of this. Remember that ordinances come to Council. Councilmember Hendriksen stated if this is not designated transitional, it will not apply. He stated he just does not understand why we have said these people do not need protection. Special City Council/March 30, 1999 Page 10 of 15