Laserfiche WebLink
Minutes of 8/27/07 <br />Regular City Council Meeting <br />Page 16 <br />tions that the developer had to meet to receive approval by City staff <br />throughout the process. Councilmember Roe further opined that the <br />City Council needed to rely on the expertise of their staff in making <br />sure that the agreement, as approved by the City Council, was suffi- <br />cient to meet City Code. <br />Councilmember Ihlan spoke against the motion, opining that State <br />Statute was clear that applicable regulations of City Code needed to <br />be met by the applicant, and further opined that the applicant had not <br />met those requirements, and that the City Council needed to enforce <br />their own conditions. Councilmember Ihlan noted that she didn't vote <br />for the Preliminary Plat due to environmental impact concerns, loss of <br />trees, and storm water runoff. Councilmember Ihlan concluded that <br />there was no reason to grant the Final Plat with no mechanisms in <br />place to enforce conditions. <br />Public Comment <br />Vivian Ramalingam <br />Ms. Ramalingam questioned if trees had already been felled on the <br />property if that made a tree preservation plan moot. <br />Councilmember Kough reintroduced his notification requirement for <br />property owners within 300' of any proposed lot splits, and sought an <br />amendment to the motion. Councilmember Kough spoke in opposi- <br />tion to the motion without such an amendment. <br />Mayor Klausing declared the motion not relevant to the underlying <br />motion. Mayor Klausing requested that Councilmember Kough could <br />appeal the motion of the Chair and put his motion to a vote; or make <br />his motion as a separate motion. <br />Discussion ensued regarding public notice requirements for Prelimi- <br />nary Plat approvals at the Planning Commission level; and clarifica- <br />tion of Councilmember Kough's previous correspondence with staff <br />on basing the size of new lots in lot split situations based on contigu- <br />ous lot sizes. <br />Councilmember Ihlan opined that she would support Councilmember <br />Kough's motion as a separate policy item. <br />