CCP 08222022 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

RCA Attachment D Regular City Council Meeting Monday, July 25, 2022 Page 5 178 been talked about much is the trees. Trees on private property cannot be controlled 179 by the City and anyone can cut down all the trees on their property. He explained 180 he was concerned about the light pollution as well but what is before the City Coun- 181 cil meets what the City has in place for zoning. 182 183 Councilmember Etten indicated this application is in under the CityÓs current rules 184 but wondered if City Attorney Gaughan was indicating the City could put on a 185 moratorium and change those rules without accepting this. 186 187 City Attorney Gaughan indicated that was correct. If the City Council was not of 188 the mindset to approve this plat as presented, the Council could table the matter for 189 a specific period of time to notice requirements for a potential moratorium, which 190 is an ordinance itself. Then come back with this application with a potential mor- 191 atorium ordinance for a moratorium to be heard by the Council at the next City 192 Council meeting. The Council, at that time, can tackle the two issues of imposing 193 an interim ordinance, a moratorium to rest the application or to move forward with 194 the application. That would be his recommended course of action if the Council 195 does not collectively want to pursue an approval. 196 197 Councilmember Etten explained that would necessitate a City-wide effort to relook 198 at the rules for LDR. 199 200 City Attorney Gaughan indicated that was correct and future applications similar to 201 this would not be allowed to move forward until the expiration of the moratorium. 202 203 Councilmember Strahan asked with that in mind, does the City have to be on a path 204 to making a change in the zoning Citywide. She indicated the City cannot just put 205 a moratorium on and not make a change. The City would need to be studying to 206 make a change to LDR, City wide, moving forward. 207 208 City Attorney Gaughan indicated the City would be required to research the partic- 209 ular issue but are not mandated to make a change after further research. 210 211 Mayor Roe indicated he was not sure if he was at the point of looking at a morato- 212 rium or changes to the CityÓs LDR standards. He noted this was the first proposal 213 along these lines that the City Council has had before them on these lines and he 214 was still trying to understand it better. He thought there was potential in any case 215 to find reasons for denial of any preliminary plat, obviously with supporting find- 216 ings. 217 218 Mayor Roe noted the two choices the Council can make are to take the bigger look 219 at the standards in the LDR Zoning District and reconsider the decision made as a 220 part of the Zoning Code update last year or take this particular proposal up on its 221 merits and either approve or deny with findings. 222 Page 6 of 50