01/31/1979 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

JOINT MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL January 31, 1979 Page three DISCUSSION OF STATUS OF ACTION ITEMS: (continued) that these matters should be handled by Staff. Commissioner Lachenbruch noted that the firm of William Cotton and Associates included at least three professionals, at least two of wham are expert soils engineers and that this is a broad spectrum of professional help that is available to the Town. It was emphasized by Councilmen Perkins and McReynolds that the review of soils and geology reports should include a visit to the site to see what actually exists in the ground. The soils and geology review should not be a cursory review of docim:ents. Mayor Hillestad asked that all letters of transmittal for material be reviewed and available for Council, and that in the near future Mr. Cotton be invited to a Council meeting to discuss his role as Town Geologist. Councilman Perkins reported on Item IIID "Subdivision and Site Development Committee". He noted he was not prepared to report yet on the Subdivision Committee and moved on to the Site Development Committee report. A report was given on discussion with City Engineer/Planner and research on the ways site development is handled in other towns. Areas pointed to as crucial for appropriate site development review were ordinance canpliance and the meeting of certain aesthetics. Ways of meeting Site Development Committee responsibilities were discussed. These were: 1) a review of the list of conditions for the applicable subdivision and a review of the subdivision map, 2) an evaluation of the site development plan to determine if the plan was in accord with purposes set forth in the General Plan. Certain problem areas needed clarification: one of then was that the ordinances needed to be clarified. In this regard, it was noted that one of the areas that needed to be clarified was the matter of foundation type for slope areas exceeding 14%. while the foundation type was delineated in Ordinance 232, it was not set out in the Site Development ordinances, and this resulted in problem situations such as the Saul site development plan. One last way of an adequate site development review was that all members assigned to the Site Development ce mittee be present for the meeting. on Items E and F "Review Fee Schedules" and 'Other", it was noted that some informa- tion is being compiled, and that the date for consideration of these matters can be set at the February 28th meeting. Chairman Stewart of the Planning Commission reported on Items II and IV, noting that because of the press of work and unavailability of some Planning Commissioners, little more than committee assignments had been accomplished. Work would begin as soon as Commissioners were available. He diqi, loweper, irP He did, however, report that a limitation of 1,000 square feet had been set for secondary dwellings by the Commissioners until a more thorough consideration of this matter could be worked out. It was then determined to hold approval of these Minutes until the next Joint Meeting. Councilman Proft noted that the roll call vote was missing under the last Motion of Item E.2. on the February 7, 1979 Minutes and it is as follows: ,,,(ar`� AYES: Mayor Hillestad, Councilmembers Nystrom and Perkins. 00( NOES: Councilmembers McReynolds and Proft. Y ADJOURNMENT: 7' There being no further business to discuss, the joint meeting was adjourned by Mayor Hillestad at 9:12 p.m. Respectfully sutmitted, Ethel Hopkins Planning Secretary