06/28/1978 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I time. It was felt the residents should know more about City processes of development, and some land areas will require phasing and timing. However e staff does not yet know what that time frame would be. The Planning commission will be looking at a priority list for the annexations and perhaps Council would wish to review that priority list. He noted the City was not ready to accept all of the annexations at one time because the service level is not available. He also mentioned the Boundary Commission will insist the City provide information as to how services will be provided for these areas before they are annexed. Ms. Smith hoped Council would provide staff and the Planning Commission with the flexibility needed. Mr. Bradley noted he was not sure he favored or opposed the annexations. Mr. Haws wondered if the Planning Commission and Planning staff could consider all the annexations in stages, but present them at one time for consideration by Council. Mayor Keller said generally speaking, because of the planning process and city policies, it seemed Council was saying it agreed that these areas should be annexed. However, recognizing planning had not been done and there was a time factor involved, Council would have to allow for those circumstances. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to authorize the Planning Commission to proceed with the study and hearings for annexation of the Willakenzie islands areas. Mr. Saul noted if Council were to approve the motion, the Planning Commission would be setting a priority list. That priority list will be e presented to Council to indicate how the Planning Commission wishes to approach the issue. Vote was taken on the motion, which carried unanimously. VII I. Review of Hearings Official Process Re: PUD 6onsiderations--Report distributed. ,- - Mr. Bernhard said last September the Council had approved the transfer of PUDs to a hearings official from the Planning Commission, and wished a review of that process in six months' time. This report was in response to that request by Council. The Planning Commission had heard a report, interviewed the Hearings Official, and during the six-month interval had attended the PUDs hearings. The Planning Commission was basically pleased with the way the Hearings Official was handling the hearings. He noted of the 18 PUDs heard, about 11 did not have any public input. Of those 18, two were appealed to the City Council. One PUD is still pending and one was denied; 14 were approved. The Planning Commission agreed the process of the Hearings Official should be continued. It allows the Planning Commission more time for basic planning of policies and implementation; and the general public is served better by a single person. e 6/28/7'd--8 "'18 I