CC_Minutes_2010_0628 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, June 28, 2010 Page 17 In conclusion, Mr. Groff thanked the City Council for their consideration of his request. Councilmember Johnson deferred to the advice of the attorney at the bench if they felt there was a need to look at the ordinance language. Councilmember Pust noted the ordinance language as passed and read over the last fourteen years; and current case law providing the need for further considera- tion and sending the request through the Planning Commission process, even though she opined that the end result would not change. Mr. Trudgeon reviewed the more formal platting process and review of prelimi- nary and final plats. Additional discussion included the 60-day land use review period and time con- straints with the first portion set to expire August 3, 2010 unless extended; poten- tial amendment of ordinance; determination of unnecessary hardships; the five types of subdivisions and related criteria; and possible review by the Planning Commission at their August 2010 meeting. City Attorney Bell Beckman suggested, rather than having the applicant initiate the process again at additional cost to them, that the City Council ~ direct staff to come back with an ordinance amendment reflecting intent and then to reconsider that application at that time. Mr. Trudgeon advised that the 60-day review period could be extended another 60 days allowing for action in September or October of 2010. Councilmember Ihlan questioned the City Council's rationale in delaying this ac- tion without a discussion on the merits of the proposal or reasons for denial. Councilmember Ihlan expressed her frustration in another example of not protect- ing large lots in this neighborhood as she had originally raised in 2007. Council- member Ihlan noted, that at that time, she had proposed a moratorium on Minor Subdivisions based on her concerns that there was no existing oversight to pre- serve large lots in some neighborhoods; and her subsequent proposal for a sliding scale for lot sizes in some instances that was eventually "shot down" by the Council majority. Councilmember Ihlan opined that this was a unique neighbor- hood; and also noted that the proposed changes to zoning code further reduced minimum lot area from 11,300 to 9,500 square feet and increased impervious lot coverage. Councilmember Ihlan advised that, no matter when the issue came up for a vote, she would vote to deny it. Mayor Klausing, in reading the code, asked Councilmember Ihlan to provide the basis for such denial.