CC_Minutes_2017_0515 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, May 15, 2017 Page 18 Culver clarified that,once this was more finalized based on feedback from the Plan- ning Commission and City Council and weekly review by the Planning and Public Works Departments cooperatively, the subdivision code and design manual would both be updated and once more solidified. At that point, Mr. Culver advised that the design manual would be brought forward to the City Council not necessarily for their formal action,but for information purposes. Councilmember McGehee agreed that the more of this went into the design manual the better from a technical perspective. Mr. Culver advised that staff would anticipate and continue to lead developers of a subdivision to review both the city code and design manual as part of their applica- tion; with staff intent on balancing both between technicalities versus general in- formation. In that aspect, Mr. Culver opined that tonight's City Council direction was helpful beyond staff's perspective of what was too detailed for city code and should be moved to the manual and vice versa. City Attorney Gaughan suggested that another way to think in terms of balance was that this was a subdivision code involving divisions of land, with the necessary elements of city code intended to address geometric configurations of those lots from a subdivision application,where the radius of a turnaround may be applicable in city code, as an example, while the actual composition of that turnaround was more technical and should be addressed in the design manual. Mr. Culver concurred, noting that the concept was being considered as to at what point the city felt strongly enough that it would require a variance rather than simply negotiating with staff on certain aspects, with those items clearly identified as re- quirements in city code and not up for negotiation. Councilmember McGehee questioned how meaningful functional classifications would be if not illustrated sufficiently. If something is mandatory, however, whether highly technical or not, shouldn't it be included in city code? Councilmember Etten opined that it would become more meaningful at the point when the developer hires an engineer to plat it out. While the City Council won't build the road, Councilmember Etten opined that city code required teeth for a pro- cess in place for any variances. While recognizing tonight's discussion, Coun- cilmember Etten spoke in support of staff s intent to leave specifics out of city code for that purpose. Councilmember Willmus stated his complete agreement of what Public Works Di- rector Culver was speaking to for those things when provided for in ordinance no longer subject to administrative negotiation, but considered a standard and expec- tation of what a developer brought forward on site plans, surveys, and/or plats.