CC_Minutes_2017_0508 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, May 8, 2017 Page 14 notice to neighbors similar to that done for other administrative actions by the Com- munity Development Department. Page 10 In Line 60, Mayor Roe noted the comment for the Planning Commission's recom- mendation to add a deadline once approved but staff's comment that it would be difficult to enforce; and sought clarification. Mr. Lloyd explained the timeline involved,making it difficult for applicants to meet if a resident was carrying it forward on their own and not immediately familiar with the process itself, and if not completed, subsequently difficult for staff to enforce. If not enforceable, Mr. Lloyd questioned if it was worthwhile imposing it to begin with. However, since the Planning Commission discussion, Mr. Lloyd referenced discussions with the City Attorney who recommended that it was still appropriate to have a timeline, and enforce it by withholding a building permit to ensure the process is completed. Therefore, Mr. Lloyd advised that staff's recommendation, based on the City Attorney's advice, would be to add a reasonable timeline for recording of any of these applications. However, Mr. Lloyd opined that one year may be more than enough,but two months seemed not enough time. Councilmember Willmus opined that any timeline called out should mirror that in place at the county level. Mr. Lloyd advised that he would research those timelines for city approved items. Mayor Roe suggested a six-month timeline as a reasonable compromise providing the process is clear for applicants and anyone involved. Pie 11 In Section 61 (Minor Plat), Mr. Lloyd advised that the idea was essentially for a Minor Subdivision process with a greater level of detail at the front end of applica- tions, and required filing of the plat documents at the end of the process. Councilmember McGehee stated her interest in providing public notice of a project with a map or picture of the area; and addressing the layout, drainage and tree preservation in this area as well as with other areas of code where applicable. Coun- cilmember McGehee referenced the Oak Acres project as a case in point,where the results had been clear-cutting with no drainage plan; opining something was miss- ing in the city's current process. Mr. Lamb noted that this was intended to be addressed in Chapter 1103; with con- currence by Mr. Lloyd in the standards and layout provisions. If the City Council agrees that this process seems reasonable to pursue, Mr. Lloyd recommended that