01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Alan Roberts suggested that a fair solution would be to take the issue back to the voters and ask, rather than second guess, what their intent was with regards to roads. With regards to ridgeline definitions, he said he advised the Council of the need for some real world analysis back in November and proposed the idea of a ridgeline inventory to the Planning Commission. He asked that the Council not vote with the staff recommendation to evaluate ridgelines on a project by project basis, which would result in long and contentious meetings like this on every proposal that comes forward. Mayor Thorne closed the public hearing. BREAK: Mayor Thorne called a brief recess at 8:58 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:08 p.m. Councilmember Brown said the comments of the public, affected landowners and the Planning Commission all support a ridgeline inventory. While cumbersome, she said it is something that would benefit both developers and the community in terms of disclosure. She said she could support the Commission's recommendation and noted that Mr. Roberts had already prepared a draft inventory. Vice-Mayor Cook-Kallio questioned the accuracy of Mr. Roberts inventory in light of the comments related to mapping of the Lund Ranch II parcel. She presumed that the ridgeline surveys prepared in connection with proposals already in the pipeline were done at the developer's cost and asked staff to estimate the cost to the City of preparing such an analysis ahead of time. Mr. Dolan said that it could require significant investment, more in terms of staff time than hard costs. The mapping done to date has been prepared, with preliminary input from staff, by the applicant's own civic engineers in order to allow for the level of detail that is ultimately required. He said it would be very difficult to prepare an accurate analysis with only general levels of information, which would undoubtedly result in disagreements and potentially litigation. He also clarified that if prepared on a project by project basis, the cost would be shared with the applicant but if prepared now, the onus would be entirely on the City. Vice-Mayor Cook-Kallio said she was originally inclined to favor the inventory because it would provide developers with a level of certainty. After further consideration, she doubted that it provided any certainty at all. She said she also disliked the notion of spending City funds on potential developments that may never come forward or that may have to be revisited down the road. Councilmember Pentin concurred with the Vice-Mayor. He said one of his primary concerns in running for Council was to keep this city out of litigation. He noted that the Council has a priority list of over 100 items it will be asking staff to tackle over the next two years and said that adding the cost and effort of this inventory to the workload seems burdensome and premature. He said he did not believe that PP required the inventory or that voters voted for it, therefore he did not support the proposal. Councilmember Brown asked staff to provide more specific information on costs. Mr. Dolan said it is dependent on the level of detail required but could easily add up to tens of thousands in civil engineering time. When asked whether the necessary information could be found on preexisting maps, Mr. Dolan said it did to a certain level and it is exactly that level of effort that would lead to a lawsuit. Mayor Thorne echoed the comments of the Vice-Mayor and Councilmember Pentin. He expressed concern over the cost and staff commitment in light of the City's existing workload, level of uncertainty, and potential for litigation. MOTION: It was m/s by Cook-Kallio/Pentin that an inventory of ridgelines subject to Measure PP not be incorporated in the proposed ordinance. Motion passed by the following vote: City Council Minutes Page 10 of 23 April 16, 2013