AgdaPkt 2009-08-24 clsd and reg - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Mayor Foust asked the City Clerk how much time had been spent on the speakers, and based on that fact the other party was given the floor to address Council. Bob Lanzone, attorney for the developer, spoke on the issue of the setback and he believes that legally they have met all the findings set forth by city staff in the report. MIS IralPierce to close the Public Hearing. Motion carried unanimously by roll call vote. Mayor Foust asked the City Attorney to comment on the campaign contributions. Mr. Yamamoto said that assuming contributions were made, these do not constitute income and so there is no conflict of interest. One Council Member said that the Council studies the issues and consequently decisions are based on the facts presented. This Council Member added that as members of this community Council Members vote on the interest of the community. Another Council Member said that he has not taken any money by the form of contributions and he disagrees with the comments made by Ms. Patterson and when the public attacks one member of the Council it attacks the body as a whole. Mayor Foust commented on the issues brought forth by Ms. Patterson and explained that the Council votes are based on information and not on contributions. Mr. Aranda provided a brief overview of the actions before Council. He referred to a guide sheet that staff had provided to Council on the issue of various actions Council could take tonight. Assistant City Attorney Aranda provided a brief description of what a "fair argument" is. One Council Member supports upholding the decision of the Planning Commission. He does not think that the EIR is the law in this case. It was also pointed out that two Planning Commissioners were absent at the time of the vote. Council discussed the issue of the creek setback and asked for staff's expertise on the matter. Mr. Chang, Building, Infrastructure and Transportation Director, responded to questions pertaining to the 15 feet setback. He clarified that there is no creek setback zoning ordinance but what there is a storm water treatment zoning ordinance. Ms. Ekas, Planning Manager, spoke about three findings that have been reviewed and the article 42 of the zoning ordinance. The use permit and the planned development permit processes were discussed. MIS HowardlBain to extend the meeting till midnight. Motion carried unanimously by voice vote. One Council Member asked about alternatives and the choices and Mr. Aranda explained the choices before Council in detail. He also added that the Council could make changes to the PO permit and ask that it be brought back with modifications. Staff clarified that modifications could be implemented under the Negative Mitigated Declaration. MIS Hartnett/Howard to: 1. Move to Deny the Appeal thereby approving the Planning Commission's adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) based on the following findings: a. The Council finds that there are no credible facts (substantial evidence) contained in the administrative record and in the evidence and testimony presented at this JOINT CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 3, 2009 PAGE 8