02/14/1977 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. on the city sewers. Mr. Bradley asked if the City could review the Planning Commission's site review Phase II, to which Mr. Long replie~ the City could do so. As to whether it would satisfy the condition of the site review is another question, as the City has a different code system than the County. Mr. Long said it was not the zoning but the site review which was judgmental and under some- one else's orders. Mr. Obie said since the property was in the city, the responsibility must lie with the City eouncil, and the eouncil should acknowledge its responsibility and delegate it. He asked it if would be possible to have a review by both entities. Mr. Saul said the staff could review it and its response could be for- warded to the County. Mr. Obie asked if the County could chose to ignore the City's recommendation. Mr. Saul said they could do so, but had given way to the City's recommendations at the last site review. Mr. Gleaves said he felt there was substantial misapprehension on both the part of the City and County staffs. He felt that the City staff should be directed to be involved in this site review. There was no input on record from the City; the County was ready to proceed. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Williams, to authorize the eity Manager to execute an agreement with the eounty. e Mr. Bradley asked if there was any indication as to what decision would facilitate the original design and intent of the solid waste site. Mr. Long said the jurisdictional question was a confusing one, but one way to go on with the project now would be to authorize this agreement. Mr. Obie asked if the intergovernmental agreement could include input from the City staff. Mr. Long replied that it does not address the question. The County will have a public hearing, and the staff could appear then. Mr. Bradley asked if it would come back to the City staff for review. Mr. Saul replied the Planning Commission has a monumental workload, and there is no flexibility in scheduling such a major project and asked what the necessity would be for such a review. Mr. Obie felt there was no need for holding two public hearings, but there was a need for the City staff to have formal input in this matter. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to amend the motion to include staff participating in the review process with the County. Vote was taken on the amendment to the motion which carried, with all Council members present voting aye; Mr. Hamel abstaining. Vote was taken on the original motion which carried, with all eouncil members present voting aye; Mr. Hamel abstaining. . 2/14/77-- 45 \~I