City Council Minutes 2017 08 15 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Meeting Minutes August 15, 2017 Page 7 of 13 We request approval of the site plan as presented, the PUD amendment, the utility plan for one water tap, and the notes showing the existing water tap will be utilized to serve the new addition Public Comments John Leary, 1116 Lafarge Avenue, stated that in 2008 a legal opinion was written for the City about the design guidelines. It's clear the design guidelines are part of our ordinances and are law He stated that this site plan should be given more weight than arbitrary standards Council Comments Councilmember Keany asked staff why they asked for the removal of the demising walls to make it one premise. Director Kowar stated that often what looks like one building in a strip mall is actually multiple buildings with many separate taps This is the same interpretation. He stated the question is really what is the minimum threshold to be considered one budding. He stated this design is on the edge of what could be considered one or two buildings so staff has looked at what we have done historically in these situations and that is consider it two premises Director Zucarro stated this is a PUD application and there are PUD criteria to be considered. The definition of a premise is not a part of this PUD discussion Discussion of taps is not appropriate in a zoning document. Councilmember Keany stated that in Utility Committee meetings he had been told if the buildings were attached one tap was required. The applicant made it one structure to preserve the front building, so why are we still calling this two buildings'? There is no clear path forward for the applicant and the applicant has no assurance they will only be charged one tap fee at permitting He stated he is extremely frustrated and it seems the City is going out of the way to be difficult with the applicant. Attomey Light noted that the Council has to operate within the current ordinances Currently, Title 17 is not designed to address the tap fee issue. That could be changed later, but at this time the current ordinances apply He stated Title 13 says two or more premises may not be served by one tap The PUD does allow the framework for what may be built under the PUD, but manner and method of construction matters to the evaluation of what constitutes a premise. Something short of full construction drawings may allow for a determination, but the Public Works Department does not yet have drawings that show the manner and method of construction Without those a determination cannot be made. Junsdictionally, this is how these determinations are made under the current code. Council can change those later if they choose to. This PUD cannot give a "no" or a "yes" as to what constitutes a premise.