City Council Minutes 1994 10 04 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Howard wondered if all of the Special Review Use stipulations were being met at this time. Griffiths had not focused her review of this proposal in those terms. She felt that was a question the Council had to answer based upon the evidence that was presented to it during this hearing. Howard wondered if design guidelines by a developer constitute an agreement by the city to accept the guidelines as a legal document. Griffiths stated that, if Howard was saying, can a developer propose design guidelines and unilaterally bind the city to those design guidelines, the answer is "no." Griffiths was not certain if the city had bound itself to design guidelines by the developer. She knew there was a discussion in one of the agreements with respect to design guidelines. She was unsure how they had been applied in the past. Kottke stated that it is referenced specifically in the 1985 agreement, in the last paragraph that the parties agree to the design guidelines dated November 5, 1985. Howard wondered if there was some kind of "tit-for-tat" agreement guaranteeing density for use by the developer based upon infrastructure improvements. Griffiths referred to a letter provided to the Planning Commission from Dan Blankenship dated March 25, 1994, to Paul Wood regarding the Centennial II/McStain public improvements stating in part that it was the opinion of the Public Works Department that the public improvements constructed by McStain Enterprises would not have been any different if the Centennial II parcel was zoned for either multi-unit residential or single family residential. Kottke did not feel it was a question of the amount of the infrastructure, but the timing in which the infrastructure had to be put in. Howard wondered if the city was under any obligation to give an access easement from city property. Griffiths: No, not to my knowledge. Howard stated that the 52% open space included yards and he wondered if it included streets, driveways, and other public improvements. Hanson: No, it doesn't. It includes only areas that are landscaped. Lathrop noted that staffs recommendation to the Planning Commission was for recommendation for approval with four conditions and staffs recommendation to Council was for denial. Wood stated that staffs recommendation was to uphold the Planning Commission's findings. He felt his job was to bring Council the Planning Commission's recommendation, as his comments, referral, 14