Rule 1: New Council members are to be appointed by the Mayor and approved by a majorit vote of the Council.
Analysis 1: Doug Hawkins, Jr. resigned from the Council due to conflicts with work. John O'Hara served on the Planning and Zoning Commission for a number of years and for a time served as the Chair of the P&Z Commission. He has lived in the area for 10 years and Sandpoint for 7 years.
Conclusion 1: I voted for John O'Hara because I think his P&Z experience will serve him well on the Council. He is level-headed and logical and I think that he'll make decisions that are in the best interest of Sandpoint.
Issue 2: Whether to approve the zone change for the Pederson sports complex.
Rule: Zone changes are to be approved if they are in line with the Comprehensive Plan and meet criteria established in the Sandpoint City Code. However, a zone change cannot be tied to a specific proposal.
Analysis 2: Bruce Pedersen is a local developer. He has requested two zoning changes for a large-scale project. First, he has requested a change from Residence B to Residence C for approximately 1.2 acres near downtown Sandpoint. Second he has requested a zone change from Residence “B” to Professional Office “PO” for approximately 0.9 acres in the same area. Mr. Pedersen is proposing a large-scale ice rink and condominium project. The project has been named the Jamie Packer Center.
Conclusion 2: In this case, I approved the zone change. I believe that the changes are reasonable and in line with the Comprehensive Plan. The measure passed.
Issue 3: Whether to overturn the Planning & Zoning Commission's decision to deny the application permit for the Jamie Packer Center.
Rule 3: The P&Z decision to approve the Jamie Packer Center was challenged by two individuals impacted by the development. The Lysters opposed the decision based on specific points for approval of the application permit.
Analysis 3: In my opinion, the Jamie Packer Center is well-designed. It has multiple elements which are in line with the Comprehensive Plan. It provides for parking, a community recreation center, mixed use housing, retail and preservation of the historic sites in the area. In addition, the development includes modern elements such as a vegetative roof, and scaled design.
This is a major development for Sandpoint. I feel that it's been done in a way that's consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. It preserves historic elements on the site and builds facilities that people in the City of Sandpoint have requested - such as a recreation center. However, there is the definite possibility that the proposals and design could change dramatically. For that reason, I supported every condition that tied to the developer to the proposal. As part of the application, I supported measures that required the specific design elements of the project. These were to insure that approval wasn't granted and then the plan dramatically re-designed.
Conclusion 3: I voted in favor of upholding the decision however, only if the developer followed the plan exactly as proposed.
Issue 4: Whether to place a roundabout at Larch and Boyer.
Rule 4: The Super 1 Foods building is to be constructed at the corner of Larch and Boyer. As a result of this construction, Super 1 must make some traffic improvements through use of its impact dollars.
Analysis 4: Boyer will be increasingly trafficked as a result of development along Boyer. As a result of the increase, it will be necessary to put some sort of traffic control device on Boyer and Larch. The decision is between a roundabout and a traffic signal.
I am in favor of the traffic signal as I think the roundabout is overly expensive. However, installing a traffic signal requires nearly as much space as a roundabout. The construction cost for a traffic signal is slightly less. The annual maintenance for a traffic signal is much greater, approximately $40k - $60k per year. Unfortunately, the standards for traffic signals do not allow small, unobtrusive signals on the sides of the street but instead major signals supported by large infrastructure.
Conclusion 4: I voted to install the roundabout. Traffic modeling shows that the roundabout will be more effective. In addition, it will cost less over the long run.
Issue 5: Whether to place the water bond on the November ballot for approval by the voters of Sandpoint.
Rule 5: The Idaho Constitution does not permit a municipality to indebt itself for more than one year. Indebtedness for more than one year requires approval by the voters.
Analysis 5: The City of Sandpoint will soon exceed its water supply capacity. This will primarily occur during the months from July to October when people are watering their lawns. Conservation measures and rates will only do so much.
The voters of Sandpoint didn't approve the bond at a special election held earlier this year. The Mayor and staff feel that this should be returned to the November ballot in order to avoid a possible crisis of water within the next few years. It will take approximately 3 years to construct the plant and therefore to address problems, the City should begin construction soon.
I voted to place the bond on the November ballot because even as a Councilman, I underestimated the seriousness of the situation. In order for people to enjoy the supply of water withotu interruption, then it will be necessary to construct some improvements. I believe that this highlights the need to regionalize water and sewer services but this will be a long process.
No comments:
Post a Comment