Laserfiche WebLink
City Council ll~inutes <br />August 17, 2009 <br />Page 3 <br />agreeing to a worksession meeting could be a request for a written extension of the time the <br />city must act upon these two items. He noted the economists report is very lengthy and will <br />~~ <br />take time to analyze and digest, <br />He stated a question that has been raised with this additional information is whether this is <br />essentially the same proposal ox outside the bounds of the original application. He stated <br />past pity protocol for amendments to an application that generally does not increase the <br />level of development are okay to address within the pending application. He further stated it <br />would be appropriate to give the public another opportunity to review and speak on this <br />new information, <br />Councilmember Westgaard stated he was not interested in constantly extending this <br />application but noted it is not a decision to take lightly due to its impacts to the community. <br />He expressed concerns with new information constantly coming in from the landfill and not <br />having a final plan. He suggested having the workshop on September 14 and for Council to <br />make a decision at the September 21 meeting. <br />Mr. l~.aellas stated the report is done as of tonight and available to Council to generate ideas. <br />Councilmember Zerwas stated changing the footprint affects more than the conditional use <br />permit portion of the application. He stated for him it goes to the heart of the land use <br />decision. He stated his concerns were for the economic impacts of the request and this <br />seems to be one attempt to address one phase. He stated his concern is getting this new <br />proposal so late in the process. He has no issue with moving forward to a worksession but <br />he said i~ a month he doesn't want the landfill to come back with another set of proposals <br />at the meeting. He stated the Landfill needs to meet with city staff so the city can get the <br />actual final proposal, He stated these last minute changes without staff review are very <br />{ <br />frustrating. <br />Councilmembex Gumphrey questioned the landfill regarding how long they have been <br />planning this project. <br />Mr. r~aellas stated 2001. <br />Councilmember Gumphrey stated the landfill has had $ years to prepare this and it is <br />ridiculous that they are coming up with these last minute change requests. He stated he was <br />ready to address this request tonight. <br />Mr. I~.aellas stated Waste Management is trying to be responsive to the needs of the <br />community that were expressed at the public hearing and to address some of the issues that <br />were raised. <br />Councilmember Gumphrey stated the landfill has been planning this for S years but has only <br />been listening to input at the last two meetings, which should have been done at the very <br />beginning of their study in 2001. <br />Councilmember Zerwas stated he appreciates the landfill hying to be flexible and receptive <br />to the community but his main concern is the recent communication issues between the city <br />and landfill. staff who both need to get together with a final plan that Council can review at <br />the worksession, <br />J <br />