Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Planning and Economic Development Committee - 03/15/1994. KENT CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE March 15, 1994 4:00 PM Committee Members Present Leona Orr, Chair Jon Johnson Tim Clark Planning Staff Jim Harris Margaret Porter Fred Satterstrom Betsy Czark City Attorney's Office Other City Staff Arthur Martin Other Ouests Bob McIssac INTERIM POTENTIAL GROWTH AREA (J. Harris) (Corrections at the request of King County Planning Director Jim Harris went over some modifications submitted by King County on the potential interim growth boundaries. Chair Orr said it was her understanding that when the City of Kent passed the resolution on the interim growth boundaries that King County probably would be responding with some minor changes. Jim said he agreed. King County now has reviewed the growth area boundaries and has made minor corrections. Mr. Harris suggested the map be redrawn to show these corrections and to not amend the resolution. The three Committee members agreed. Mr. Harris said he would see that the map is redrawn indicating these corrections. GROWTH MANAGEMENT UPDATE (F. Satterstrom) Planning Manager Fred Satterstrom informed the Committee that the City of Kent does not have six more months to complete the Comprehensive Plan as indicated in recent newspaper articles in the Valley Daily News and Seattle times. The Legislature gave an additional six month period to the end of the year for cities and counties who did not finish their comprehensive plan by July 1st the ability to continue to collect impact fees until December 31, 1994, as long as their plan is adopted by the end of the year. Mr. Satterstrom said the one thing that has an impact directly to the Comprehensive Plan is the progress on the Capital Facilities Plan. There is a lot of transition on this project. A lot of people who were CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 2 working on this months ago are no longer working on it right now nor directing the project. Over the next eight weeks, the Mayor and Brent McFall have devised an extensive work program where they will be intensively working with Henderson, Young & Company to come up with alternatives for the Council's consideration on the Capital Facilities Plan. Also, it was reported that the Transportation element is expected to be partially completed so it can be put into the Comprehensive Plan around April 1st. The Parks consultant, Beckwith Consulting Group, is also not finished with their work at the present time. Fred said the Planning Department will not be able to make the April hearing schedule with the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission hearing dates cannot be reliably set with all the lose ends. The issue is over how to control things that are outside the Planning Department and the interdependence on all of these contracts and decisions that are being made. The Planning Commission hearings could begin no sooner than the end of May 1994 or later. Fred explained the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is contingent upon the land use and transportation elements; the land use and transportation elements cannot be considered separately from the Capital Facilities element. The Capital Facilities element has to -be done in order to call it truly a Comprehensive Plan because that's the whole thrust of GMA. A video will be coming out soon explaining the alternatives to the Comprehensive Plan. Community Forums will be held like those which were done two years ago. Fred stated that if anyone is interested in forming a group with their co-workers, people at school, people in their neighborhoods, or other employees are welcome to contact the Planning Department and Planning Department will train whoever would like to convene a meeting and Survey forms will be provided. With much discussion, it was agreed information needs to be given to the Council members of whatever the Planning Commission will be receiving. This will keep the Council informed before the Comprehensive Plan is brought to the Council. The information packets would have a memo attached stating, "you are getting this information so that you can follow where the Planning Commission is going but it is inappropriate to try to contact Planning Commissioners and influence their decision-making process". Also, additional information will be given to the Council when the Planning Commissioners receive any clarification information. CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 3 1995 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) LOCAL PROGRAM POLICIES AND ESTIMATED FUNDING LEVELS - (B. Czark) Planner Betsy Czark explained the 1995 Local Program Policies and the City of Kent qualifies to receive "pass-through" funds for its 1995 CDBG program. She mentioned the City has not yet received its exact estimate for the 1995 funds from King County. However, the County predicts that the 1995 funding will be at approximately the same level as 1994. The 1994 CDBG funds totaled $373,101. In addition, we are recapturing $38,830 of our 1993 CDBG funds of projects that did not get off the ground. Staff requested that the following actions be approved: 1. Approval to accept 1995 Pass -Through funds. 2. Approval to accept the $38,830 in 1993 recaptured funds for the 1995 program year. 3. Allocate the maximum available of 1995 Pass -Through funds for Public (Human) Services for the City of Kent. 4. Allocate the City's fair share maximum of 1995 Pass -Through funds to Planning and Administration. 5. Approval of the proposed 1995 Local Program Policies. 6. Forward these recommendations to the full City Council for consideration at its April 19, 1994 meeting. Planner Czark explained three(3) changes to the 1994 Local Program Policies. The first one is a revision to Part IV - "Public (Human) Services", to include special populations that CDBG regards as groups with a presumed benefit. It also adds a line regarding projects that are encouraged: "Preventative and subsistence programs are encouraged, especially those that leverage other services and financial resources." The second revision is the addition of Part V - "Funding Priorities", which is to make explicit the funding priorities that the Human Services Commission has always implicitly used in its application review process. The third revision is in Part VI - "Additional Evaluation Criteria", which is to reduce redundancies with other sections of the policies. The items that were deleted are now covered in either Part VI or Part V. Councilmember Clark MOVED and Chair Orr SECONDED a motion to approve the aforementioned six(6) actions. Motion carried. CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 4 ADDED ITEMS Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application and Regulatory Review Application - (J. Harris) Mr. Harris explained there is a potential problem occurring because of a person has applied for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and a rezone. With the Planning Department already involved with Comprehensive Plan project for GMA, it is difficult to handle these requests with the GMA. Mr. Satterstrom stated there very few comprehensive plan amendments in the history of the Planning Department. City Attorney Lubovich said to Fred that a person who submits an application for a rezone has the right to have the rezone application processed, even though it may be in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. This doesn't mean staff would recommend approval; it would go to the Hearing Examiner with an obvious conflict between the request and the Comprehensive Plan. Staff is askindf the Council committee members how to proceed on these kinds of issues particularly since we're so close to finishing the overall Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Johnson MOVED and Councilmember Clark SECONDED a motion to recommend to putting these Comprehensive Plan actions on hold and to fold them into the current Comprehensive Plan process until the Comprehensive Plan is done. The meeting adjourned at 5:05 p.m. PC0315.MIN . KENT CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE March 15, 1994 4:00 PM Committee Members Present Leona Orr, Chair Jon Johnson Tim Clark Planning Staff Jim Harris Margaret Porter Fred Satterstrom Betsy Czark City Attorney's Office Other City Staff Arthur Martin Other Ouests Bob McIssac INTERIM POTENTIAL GROWTH AREA (J. Harris) (Corrections at the request of King County Planning Director Jim Harris went over some modifications submitted by King County on the potential interim growth boundaries. Chair Orr said it was her understanding that when the City of Kent passed the resolution on the interim growth boundaries that King County probably would be responding with some minor changes. Jim said he agreed. King County now has reviewed the growth area boundaries and has made minor corrections. Mr. Harris suggested the map be redrawn to show these corrections and to not amend the resolution. The three Committee members agreed. Mr. Harris said he would see that the map is redrawn indicating these corrections. GROWTH MANAGEMENT UPDATE (F. Satterstrom) Planning Manager Fred Satterstrom informed the Committee that the City of Kent does not have six more months to complete the Comprehensive Plan as indicated in recent newspaper articles in the Valley Daily News and Seattle times. The Legislature gave an additional six month period to the end of the year for cities and counties who did not finish their comprehensive plan by July 1st the ability to continue to collect impact fees until December 31, 1994, as long as their plan is adopted by the end of the year. Mr. Satterstrom said the one thing that has an impact directly to the Comprehensive Plan is the progress on the Capital Facilities Plan. There is a lot of transition on this project. A lot of people who were CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 2 working on this months ago are no longer working on it right now nor directing the project. Over the next eight weeks, the Mayor and Brent McFall have devised an extensive work program where they will be intensively working with Henderson, Young & Company to come up with alternatives for the Council's consideration on the Capital Facilities Plan. Also, it was reported that the Transportation element is expected to be partially completed so it can be put into the Comprehensive Plan around April 1st. The Parks consultant, Beckwith Consulting Group, is also not finished with their work at the present time. Fred said the Planning Department will not be able to make the April hearing schedule with the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission hearing dates cannot be reliably set with all the lose ends. The issue is over how to control things that are outside the Planning Department and the interdependence on all of these contracts and decisions that are being made. The Planning Commission hearings could begin no sooner than the end of May 1994 or later. Fred explained the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is contingent upon the land use and transportation elements; the land use and transportation elements cannot be considered separately from the Capital Facilities element. The Capital Facilities element has to -be done in order to call it truly a Comprehensive Plan because that's the whole thrust of GMA. A video will be coming out soon explaining the alternatives to the Comprehensive Plan. Community Forums will be held like those which were done two years ago. Fred stated that if anyone is interested in forming a group with their co-workers, people at school, people in their neighborhoods, or other employees are welcome to contact the Planning Department and Planning Department will train whoever would like to convene a meeting and Survey forms will be provided. With much discussion, it was agreed information needs to be given to the Council members of whatever the Planning Commission will be receiving. This will keep the Council informed before the Comprehensive Plan is brought to the Council. The information packets would have a memo attached stating, "you are getting this information so that you can follow where the Planning Commission is going but it is inappropriate to try to contact Planning Commissioners and influence their decision-making process". Also, additional information will be given to the Council when the Planning Commissioners receive any clarification information. CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 3 1995 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) LOCAL PROGRAM POLICIES AND ESTIMATED FUNDING LEVELS - (B. Czark) Planner Betsy Czark explained the 1995 Local Program Policies and the City of Kent qualifies to receive "pass-through" funds for its 1995 CDBG program. She mentioned the City has not yet received its exact estimate for the 1995 funds from King County. However, the County predicts that the 1995 funding will be at approximately the same level as 1994. The 1994 CDBG funds totaled $373,101. In addition, we are recapturing $38,830 of our 1993 CDBG funds of projects that did not get off the ground. Staff requested that the following actions be approved: 1. Approval to accept 1995 Pass -Through funds. 2. Approval to accept the $38,830 in 1993 recaptured funds for the 1995 program year. 3. Allocate the maximum available of 1995 Pass -Through funds for Public (Human) Services for the City of Kent. 4. Allocate the City's fair share maximum of 1995 Pass -Through funds to Planning and Administration. 5. Approval of the proposed 1995 Local Program Policies. 6. Forward these recommendations to the full City Council for consideration at its April 19, 1994 meeting. Planner Czark explained three(3) changes to the 1994 Local Program Policies. The first one is a revision to Part IV - "Public (Human) Services", to include special populations that CDBG regards as groups with a presumed benefit. It also adds a line regarding projects that are encouraged: "Preventative and subsistence programs are encouraged, especially those that leverage other services and financial resources." The second revision is the addition of Part V - "Funding Priorities", which is to make explicit the funding priorities that the Human Services Commission has always implicitly used in its application review process. The third revision is in Part VI - "Additional Evaluation Criteria", which is to reduce redundancies with other sections of the policies. The items that were deleted are now covered in either Part VI or Part V. Councilmember Clark MOVED and Chair Orr SECONDED a motion to approve the aforementioned six(6) actions. Motion carried. CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 4 ADDED ITEMS Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application and Regulatory Review Application - (J. Harris) Mr. Harris explained there is a potential problem occurring because of a person has applied for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and a rezone. With the Planning Department already involved with Comprehensive Plan project for GMA, it is difficult to handle these requests with the GMA. Mr. Satterstrom stated there very few comprehensive plan amendments in the history of the Planning Department. City Attorney Lubovich said to Fred that a person who submits an application for a rezone has the right to have the rezone application processed, even though it may be in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. This doesn't mean staff would recommend approval; it would go to the Hearing Examiner with an obvious conflict between the request and the Comprehensive Plan. Staff is askincj the Council committee members how to proceed on these kinds of issues particularly since we're so close to finishing the overall Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Johnson MOVED and Councilmember Clark SECONDED a motion to recommend to putting these Comprehensive Plan actions on hold and to fold them into the current Comprehensive Plan process until the Comprehensive Plan is done. The meeting adjourned at 5:05 p.m. PC0315.MIN CITY OF ' MIT CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE March 15, 1994 4:00 PM Committee Members Present Leona Orr, Chair Jon Johnson Tim Clark Planning Staff Jim Harris Margaret Porter Fred Satterstrom Betsy Czark City Attorney's Office Other City Staff Arthur Martin Other Ouests Bob McIssac INTERIM POTENTIAL GROWTH AREA (J. Harris) (Corrections at the request of King County Planning Director Jim Harris went over some modifications submitted by King County on the potential interim growth boundaries. Chair Orr said it was her understanding that when the City of Kent passed the resolution on the interim growth boundaries that King County probably would be responding with some minor changes. Jim said he agreed. King County now has reviewed the growth area boundaries and has made minor corrections. Mr. Harris suggested the map be redrawn to show these corrections and to not amend the resolution. The three Committee members agreed. Mr. Harris said he would see that the map is redrawn indicating these corrections. GROWTH MANAGEMENT UPDATE (F. Satterstrom) Planning Manager Fred Satterstrom informed the Committee that the City of Kent does not have six more months to complete the Comprehensive Plan as indicated in recent newspaper articles in the Valley Daily News and Seattle times. The Legislature gave an additional six month period to the end of the year for cities and counties who did not finish their comprehensive plan by July 1st the ability to continue to collect impact fees until December 31, 1994, as long as their plan is adopted by the end of the year. Mr. Satterstrom said the one thing that has an impact directly to the Comprehensive Plan is the progress on the Capital Facilities Plan. There is a lot of transition on this project. A lot of people who were CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 2 working on this months ago are no longer working on it right now nor directing the project. Over the next eight weeks, the Mayor and Brent McFall have devised an extensive work program where they will be intensively working with Henderson, Young & Company to come up with alternatives for the Council's consideration on the Capital Facilities Plan. Also, it was reported that the Transportation element is expected to be partially completed so it can be put into the Comprehensive Plan around April lst. The Parks consultant, Beckwith Consulting Group, is also not finished with their work at the present time. Fred said the Planning Department will not be able to make the April hearing schedule with the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission hearing dates cannot be reliably set with all the lose ends. The issue is over how to control things that are outside the Planning Department and the interdependence on all of these contracts and decisions that are being made. The Planning Commission hearings could begin no sooner than the end of May 1994 or later. Fred explained the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is contingent upon the land use and transportation elements; the land use and transportation elements cannot be considered separately from the Capital Facilities element. The Capital Facilities element has to -be done in order to call it truly a Comprehensive Plan because that's the whole thrust of GMA. A video will be coming out soon explaining the alternatives to the Comprehensive Plan. Community Forums will be held like those which were done two years ago. Fred stated that if anyone is interested in forming a group with their co-workers, people at school, people in their neighborhoods, or other employees are welcome to contact the Planning Department and Planning Department will train whoever would like to convene a meeting and Survey forms will be provided. With much discussion, it was agreed information needs to be given to the Council members of whatever the Planning Commission will be receiving. This will keep the Council informed before the Comprehensive Plan is brought to the Council. The information packets would have a memo attached stating, "you are getting this information so that you can follow where the Planning Commission is going but it is inappropriate to try to contact Planning Commissioners and influence their decision-making process". Also, additional information will be given to the Council when the Planning Commissioners receive any clarification information. CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 3 1995 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) LOCAL PROGRAM POLICIES AND ESTIMATED FUNDING LEVELS - (B. Czark) Planner Betsy Czark explained the 1995 Local Program Policies and the City of Kent qualifies to receive "pass-through" funds for its 1995 CDBG program. She mentioned the City has not yet received its exact estimate for the 1995 funds from King County. However, the County predicts that the 1995 funding will be at approximately the same level as 1994. The 1994 CDBG funds totaled $373,101. In addition, we are recapturing $38,830 of our 1993 CDBG funds of projects that did not get off the ground. Staff requested that the following actions be approved: 1. Approval to accept 1995 Pass -Through funds. 2. Approval to accept the $38,830 in 1993 recaptured funds for the 1995 program year. 3. Allocate the maximum available of 1995 Pass -Through funds for Public (Human) Services for the City of Kent. 4. Allocate the City's fair share maximum of 1995 Pass -Through funds to Planning and Administration. 5. Approval of the proposed 1995 Local Program Policies. 6. Forward these recommendations to the full City Council for consideration at its April 19, 1994 meeting. Planner Czark explained three(3) changes to the 1994 Local Program Policies. The first one is a revision to Part IV - "Public (Human) Services", to include special populations that CDBG regards as groups with a presumed benefit. It also adds a line regarding projects that are encouraged: "Preventative and subsistence programs are encouraged, especially those that leverage other services and financial resources." The second revision is the addition of Part V - "Funding Priorities", which is to make explicit the funding priorities that the Human Services Commission has always implicitly used in its application review process. The third revision is in Part VI - "Additional Evaluation Criteria", which is to reduce redundancies with other sections of the policies. The items that were deleted are now covered in either Part VI or Part V. Councilmember Clark MOVED and Chair Orr SECONDED a motion to approve the aforementioned six(6) actions. Motion carried. CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 4 ADDED ITEMS Mr. Harris explained there is a potential problem occurring because of a person has applied for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and a rezone. With the Planning Department already involved with Comprehensive Plan project for GMA, it is difficult to handle these requests with the GMA. Mr. Satterstrom stated there very few comprehensive plan amendments in the history of the Planning Department. City Attorney Lubovich said to Fred that a person who submits an application for a rezone has the right to have the rezone application processed, even though it may be in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. This doesn't mean staff would recommend approval; it would go to the Hearing Examiner with an obvious conflict between the request and the Comprehensive Plan. Staff is asking the Council committee members how to proceed on these kinds of issues particularly since we're so close to finishing the overall Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Johnson MOVED and Councilmember Clark SECONDED a motion to recommend to putting these Comprehensive Plan actions on hold and to fold them into the current Comprehensive Plan process until the Comprehensive Plan is done. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 5:05 p.m. PC0315.MIN CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE March 15, 1994 4:00 PM Committee Members Present Leona Orr, Chair Jon Johnson Tim Clark Planning Staff Jim Harris Margaret Porter Fred Satterstrom Betsy Czark City Attorney's Office Other City Staff Arthur Martin Other Ouests Bob McIssac INTERIM POTENTIAL GROWTH AREA (J. Harris) (Corrections at the request of King County Planning Director Jim Harris went over some modifications submitted by King County on the potential interim growth boundaries. Chair Orr said it was her understanding that when the City of Kent passed the resolution on the interim growth boundaries that King County probably would be responding with some minor changes. Jim said he agreed. King County now has reviewed the growth area boundaries and has made minor corrections. Mr. Harris suggested the map be redrawn to show these corrections and to not amend the resolution. The three Committee members agreed. Mr. Harris said he would see that the map is redrawn indicating these corrections. GROWTH MANAGEMENT UPDATE (F. Satterstrom) Planning Manager Fred Satterstrom informed the Committee that the City of Kent does not have six more months to complete the Comprehensive Plan as indicated in recent newspaper articles in the Valley Daily News and Seattle times. The Legislature gave an additional six month period to the end of the year for cities and counties who did not finish their comprehensive plan by July lst the ability to continue to collect impact fees until December 31, 1994, as long as their plan is adopted by the end of the year. Mr. Satterstrom said the one thing that has an impact directly to the Comprehensive Plan is the progress on the Capital Facilities Plan. There is a lot of transition on this project. A lot of people who were CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES �r�J MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 2 working on this months ago are no longer working on it right nc directing the project. Over the next eight weeks, the Mayor and B. McFall have devised an extensive work program where they will intensively working with Henderson, Young & Company to come up with alternatives for the Council's consideration on the Capital Facilities Plan. Also, it was reported that the Transportation element is expected to be partially completed so it can be put into the Comprehensive Plan around April lst. The Parks consultant, Beckwith Consulting Group, is also not finished with their work at the present time. Fred said the Planning Department will not be able to make the April hearing schedule with the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission hearing dates cannot be reliably set with all the lose ends. The issue is over how to control things that are outside the Planning Department and the interdependence on all of these contracts and decisions that are being made. The Planning Commission hearings could begin no sooner than the end of May 1994 or later. Fred explained the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is contingent upon the land use and transportation elements; the land use and , transportation elements cannot be considered separately from the Capital Facilities element. The Capital Facilities element has to -be done in order to call it truly a Comprehensive Plan because that's the whole thrust of GMA. A video will be coming out soon explaining the alternatives to the Comprehensive Plan. Community Forums will be held like those which were done two years ago. Fred stated that if anyone is interested in forming a group with their co-workers, people at school, people in their neighborhoods, or other employees are welcome to contact the Planning Department and Planning Department will train whoever would like to convene a meeting and Survey forms will be provided. With much discussion, it was agreed information needs to be given to the Council members of whatever the Planning Commission will be receiving. This will keep the Council informed before the Comprehensive Plan is brought to the Council. The information packets would have a memo attached stating, "you are getting this information so that you can follow where the Planning Commission is going but it is inappropriate to try to contact Planning Commissioners and influence their decision-making process". Also, additional information will be given to the Council when the Planning Commissioners receive any clarification information. CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 3 1995 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) LOCAL PROGRAM POLICIES AND ESTIMATED FUNDING LEVELS - (B. Czark) Planner Betsy Czark explained the 1995 Local Program Policies and the City of Kent qualifies to receive "pass-through" funds for its 1995 CDBG program. She mentioned the City has not yet received its exact estimate for the 1995 funds from King County. However, the County predicts that the 1995 funding will be at approximately the same level as 1994. The 1994 CDBG funds totaled $373,101. In addition, we are recaptdring $38,830 of our 1993 CDBG funds of projects that did not get off the ground. Staff requested that the following actions be approved: 1. Approval to accept 1995 Pass -Through funds. 2. Approval to accept the $38,830 in 1993 recaptured funds for the 1995 program year. 3. Allocate the maximum available of 1995 Pass -Through funds for Public (Human) Services for the City of Kent. 4. Allocate the City's fair share maximum of 1995 Pass -Through funds to Planning and Administration. 5. Approval of the proposed 1995 Local Program Policies. 6. Forward these recommendations to the full City Council for consideration at its April 19, 1994 meeting. Planner Czark explained three(3) changes to the 1994 Local Program Policies. The first one is a revision to Part IV - "Public (Human) Services", to include special populations that CDBG regards as groups with a presumed benefit. It also adds a line regarding projects that are encouraged: "Preventative and subsistence programs are encouraged, especially those that leverage other services and financial resources." The second revision is the addition of Part V - "Funding Priorities", which is to make explicit the funding priorities that the Human Services Commission has always implicitly used in its application review process. The third revision is in Part VI - "Additional Evaluation Criteria", which is to reduce redundancies with other sections of the policies. The items that were deleted are now covered in either Part VI or Part V. Councilmember Clark MOVED and Chair Orr SECONDED a motion to approve the aforementioned six(6) actions. Motion carried. CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 4 ADDED ITEMS Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application and Regulatory Review Application - (J. Harris) Mr. Harris explained there is a potential problem occurring because of a person has applied for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and a rezone. With the Planning Department already involved with Comprehensive Plan project for GMA, it is difficult to handle these requests with the GMA. Mr. Satterstrom stated there very few comprehensive plan amendments in the history of the Planning Department. City Attorney Lubovich said to Fred that a person who submits an application for a rezone has the right to have the rezone application processed, even though it may be in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. This doesn't mean staff would recommend approval; it would go to the Hearing Examiner with an obvious conflict between the request and the Comprehensive Plan. Staff is asking the Council committee members how to proceed on these kinds of issues particularly since we're so close to finishing the overall Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Johnson MOVED and Councilmember Clark SECONDED a motion to recommend to putting these Comprehensive Plan actions on hold and to fold them into the current Comprehensive Plan process until the Comprehensive Plan is done. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 5:05 p.m. PC0315.MIN