HomeMy WebLinkAboutLetter from CWIC2 08-05-13
Monday August 5, 2013
Commissioners:
It is our understanding from conversations with several Councilors that they, in fact, support
establishing some guidelines for PUD’s. A majority of Councilors are particularly interested in the
organizational aspects of the Ordinance so that submitted PUD information would be presented in a
structured format, which includes the proposed chart format. Their votes to reject the proposed
Ordinance were a result of running out of time to fix the pieces they did not support.
CWIC2 also supports organizing proposed PUD information, as well as clarifying what information is
needed and making the modification procedure consistent. This would save much time and effort for
everyone involved in the creation, evaluation, and review of PUD proposals. For example, it would have
been invaluable during the complex process involved in the 64 text-page PUD submitted in 2011 in
which related pieces of information were scattered across multiple pages. This made it extremely
difficult to decipher what was proposed initially as well as when it went through multiple rewrites (some
of which was presented at the time of the actual Committee meeting).
We share some of the Chamber’s concerns and we agree with the some of the deletions in the DOCS’
revisions. However, we like some of the omitted portions in the current proposal which we do not
believe the majority of Councilors were rejecting. We ask that you approve returning the PUD
Ordinance to Council with suggestions for revisions, including a red-lined/blue-lined/multi-colored copy
showing all the previous revisions. Returning the proposed Ordinance will provide Council the
additional time they need to review, revise as needed, and finally approve some PUD Guidelines. The
worst that can happen is that Council then decides that they still can’t satisfactorily determine
Guidelines they are happy with.
Marilyn Anderson, President Maryellen Bormett, Vice-President Dee Fox, Secretary