City Council Minutes 2014 07 01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Meeting Minutes July 1,2014 Page 8 of 31 Council member Lipton asked if the requirement for public art is voluntarily. Principal Planner McCartney explained the applicant spoke about public art as a public benefit and an enhancement therefore staff is recommending it be a condition of approval. Council member Lipton did not understand how public art could be evaluated without some criteria established by ordinance. Planning and Building Safety Director Russ explained Chapter 17.28 stipulates application for waivers can be applied for public land dedication and for improvements to public realm and staff considers these as improvements to the public realm. The applicant did not show public art in Phase 1, so staff is putting it as a condition in Phase 2. Council member Lipton felt this was a voluntary contribution, but the City has not enacted any ordinance requiring development to provide public art. He suggested Condition #3 be modified to reflect the developers voluntary contribution. Council member Stolzmann disclosed she served on the Utility Rate Task Force with Rick Brew, but she did not believe it would impact her ability to serve impartially on this request. She addressed a paper submitted by Alex Bradley relative to this development and school enrollment. She requested the document be entered into the record. City Attorney Light explained the Charter requires a copy of the document be provided to the applicant, City Council and posted for the public. Council member Keany stated his understanding the applicant is volunteering public art as part of their development in exchange for a waiver, even though there is no criteria to define or judge said public art. He felt the applicant should have time to review this condition before it is included in the resolution. Principal Planner McCartney suggested the phrase Master Plan may be too comprehensive. He stated the overall intent of the condition was a comment or note placed in the PUD. Staff wants to make sure it is carried over to Phase 2 so comment may be received. Mayor Pro Tem Dalton suggested the comment be carried forward, rather than a requirement for the applicant to produce a master plan in Phase 2. City Attorney Light commented on the document requested for the public record. He explained there are two rules 1) Under the Charter, all the agenda related materials in the packet 72 -hours in advance of the meeting. 2) The Charter stipulates if a document is presented on the night of a meeting, the City Council cannot discuss the document until it has been made available to the public. Copies were made and distributed to the applicant, the City Council and posted for the public. If the applicant objects to the document submitted, they can file an objection and request a continuance. If the applicant does not object, they can let Council know they are ready to proceed. Council member Stolzmann questioned the vacation of the right -of -way. Principal Planner McCartney explained the right -of -way near the BNSF will be vacated and the