01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Dolan said they could always apply for a variance; however, the findings are rigorous and difficult to make. He suggested that building in an exception process based on more of a common sense threshold might be a more suitable alternative. Councilmember McGovern made the following substitute motion: slope — Option 1, prohibiting the use of WIS; contour intervals — Option 1, deleting any mention of WIS; ridges and ridgelines — Option 2; streets and roadways — Option 2; manmade slopes — Option 2. Councilmember Sullivan said he largely agreed with staff's conservative approach, which generally meets his understanding of the intent of PP. He said he could support the substitute motion with several changes. While he initially supported Option 2 for streets and roads, he could see the benefit of allowing some roads under certain conditions. He felt the Council should defer to the initiative authors with Option 3 and the additional language they requested. He said he could support Option 2 for manmade slopes, with the provision of an exception process. MOTION: It was m/s by McGovern/Sullivan to approve the following recommendation: slope— Option 1, prohibiting the use of WIS; contour intervals — Option 1, deleting any mention of WIS; ridges and ridgelines — Option 2; streets and roadways — Option 2; manmade slopes— Option 2. Mayor Hosterman questioned and Councilmember Sullivan clarified that his intent was to grandfather streets and roadways addressed in PUDs and Specific Plans implemented prior to 2008. Councilmember Cook-Kallio asked whether staff would prefer to build in an exception or allow for the public process with regard to manmade slopes. Mr. Fialho said the better option from staff's perspective would be to retain the ability to evaluate each proposal as it comes forward through a public process. Councilmember Cook-Kallio said she heard Ms. Brown say this evening that a road is a structure but referred again to the minutes of June 6, 2008, which reflect the opposite. While more restrictive than what was reflected in the minutes, she said she preferred staff's recommended Option 3 over Option 2. Councilmember McGovern disagreed. She said Option 3 sets the tone for automatic approval and essentially makes the public process a useless exercise. Mr. Fialho clarified that Option 3 is simply an acknowledgement that certain PUDs and Specific Plans exist. It still provides the Council with the flexibility to determine whether the road is even of value to the community and to adjust its placement, but does rely on these existing documents for guidance. Councilmember McGovern stressed her concern over vesting rights within a Specific Plan. She and staff discussed several amendments and she ultimately suggested the following: "Determine that streets and/or roads and their attendant infrastructure are a structure in that they are a physical improvement on the property intended to accommodate development of residential and commercial structures and, therefore, are covered by Measure PP unless the street or road me prow de is covered by a Specific Plan or PUD Development Plan approved prior to November 2008. Mayor Hosterman withdrew her motion in favor of the substitute motion. MOTION: It was m/s by McGovern/Sullivan to approve the following recommendation: Calculation of 25% slope — Option 1, with language acknowledging that the WIS formula will not be used in the calculation of slope; Methodology for defining contour intervals — Option 1, provided any reference to 6