Laserfiche WebLink
<br />City Council Regular Meeting - 05/10/04 <br />Minutes - Page 12 <br /> <br />requirements; proposed location of patios on the southwest, not <br />the east side of the townhomes and the custom-design of the <br />units; reference to the Building Code to ensure compliance for <br />the roof height; and preferences for plantings of privacy fencing <br />as a buffer between the development and existing homes. <br /> <br />Mr. Pangborn referenced a letter from the developer that agreed <br />to a 30' setback. <br /> <br />David Livingston (representing Janice Porter, 2621 <br />Cohansey Street (Neighbor)) <br />Mr. Livingston noted that from the beginning, he and Ms. Porter <br />had been against this project, opining that a petition by neighbors <br />had not been recognized by the City and an Environmental <br />Impact Statement, as requested, had not been pursued. Mr. <br />Livingston requested that the City Council protect the overall <br />good of the City and diligently pursue stringent oversight during <br />the construction of this project. Mr. Livingston reiterated his <br />disagreement with the project going forward. <br /> <br />Mayor Klausing closed public comment to pursue additional <br />Council discussion and the three requested motions. <br /> <br />Discussion again ensued among the City Council, staff and the <br />developer related to PUD requirements; preference by the <br />developer to install landscaping buffers rather than privacy <br />fencing; developer agreement to provide 30' rather than 25' <br />setbacks; 8/12 roof pitch related to various sized plans involved; <br />and the City's determination that an environmental assessment <br />was not applicable for this project. <br /> <br />Councilmember Ihlan, noting that she was not on the City <br />Council during the concept stage of this development, <br />recognized several issues she wished to discuss, whether <br />resolution was possible as part of the process for this project, or <br />whether they were more appropriate for future discussion and <br />future projects. Councilmember Ihlan noted that dedication of <br />excess land (Outlot A) for park expansion addressed some issues, <br />but not the displaced wildlife habitat issue that remained <br />outstanding as per previous citizen petition. Councilmember <br />Ihlan also addressed whether the City needed to institute its own <br />