1996-08-13 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I Council Meeting Minutes of August 13, 1996 Council Business continued Gunderman asked if the area near Hub Cap Warehouse is available. Mattila said this area is included in the moratorium. Larson noted the Moore site which a single family home occupies. Mattila said this site may accommodate COC, and currently the home is considered a non-conforming use. DeCoux said COC intents to create a job base and tax dollars for the City, and continued to request an exemption. DeCoux asked if COC could make cosmetic improvements to the Basic Industries building. Mattila said internal improvements do not require site plan review and would be exempt from the moratorium. The moratorium would impact a property if exterior walls were expanded. Benke said the long range plan will state the wishes of the community and include guidelines to avoid conflicts of interest. Discussions with the applicants should continue in fairness to the property owners. The flfst step is to create an inventory of all property owners and survey them of their interests and long term plans. This is key to visioning. LeFevere said the Cadwallader proposal would be deemed denied, however, staff could come before Council with an amendment. Benke said Council could direct staff to discuss the issue with the Planning Commission. LeFevere said the Planning Commission has not reviewed the moratorium. Williams firmly believes the Planning Commission be given opportunity to review the moratorium. Samuelson asked if the Planning Commission could review the moratorium before Council adoption. LeFevere's concern is the City would run out of time concerning the 6O-day statutory limit for action on the Tom Thumb application. Williams said the Planning Commission could review the ordinance on August 20. Benke suggested Council adopt the ordinance and then make amendments after Planning Commission review. LeFevere said that protecting the planning process is appropriate although it may create hardships, and creating uncertainty for applicants is not helpful. Homeowners should be on notice of possible rezoning. LeFevere feels if Council delayed adoption, more proposals may come forward. To amend the moratorium, a formal public hearing process or Planning Commission review is not required. Motion by Williams, seconded by Benke, to GIVE A SECOND READING, ORDER PUBLICATION, AND ADOPT THE ORDINANCE PLACING A MORATORIUM ON DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY ON CERTAIN PROPERTY WITHIN THE HIGHWAY 8 CORRIDOR; AND REFER ORDINANCE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT. 5 Ayes - 0 Nayes, Motion Carried. Council requested staff to continue to work with COC and Cadwallader. Economic Development Specialist Jill Hanson presented the RFP to solicit proposals from interested flfms to complete a Hwy 8 Corridor Plan. The tirst phase would be a schematic plan or vision for each sub-area, and more detailed plans involve the second phase. The plans may be used to select developers for individual sites. A group of potential consultants will be mailed the RFP in mid-August; submittal deadline will be early September. Key criteria includes: specific and general experience with development plans, firm experience, clarity and scope of work, costs, and references. Specific parcels may vary as the study dedicates, but areas of major study are the northwest quadrant, the pole yards, northern gateway, and Jones Lake Area. Page 6 Council Business Highway 8 Moratorium Report 96-182 Ordinance 623 RFP Highway 8 Report 96-183