Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Island Crossing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Arlington City staff seek extension of Island Crossing moratorium to complete planned-action and EIS
Summary
City staff asked the council at a workshop to extend a development moratorium in the Island Crossing area so the city can adopt a planned-action ordinance and complete an environmental impact statement (EIS); staff said the sub-area plan is finished but new ordinance language requires the additional step.
At a council workshop, Arlington City planning staff asked council to extend the Island Crossing moratorium so the city can adopt a planned-action ordinance and complete an environmental impact statement (EIS) before formally approving the Island Crossing sub-area plan.
Planning staff member Amy Parqueys said the city finished the sub-area plan before the current moratorium expired but must now do a planned-action ordinance and an EIS because recent changes to ordinance language require that step. "We have done that, and we did it before the moratorium was up, but we need to be able to do a planned action ordinance and conduct an EIS of the Island Crossing area before we can adopt the sub area plan," Parqueys said.
City staff and council members described the intended benefits. Parqueys said a planned action converts the sub-area plan’s conditions into a single, binding document that provides predictability for future development: "That document is good for, a minimum of 20 years so it gives you predictability of the outcome of development in island crossing for the the next 20 years for that next planning horizon." She added that the associated EIS and planned-action framework are intended to expedite SEPA reviews for projects that fall inside the plan’s parameters by allowing a modified SEPA checklist for applicants.
Councilmember Michelle Blythe said extending the moratorium was meant to allow the city to "get things right" and perform due diligence before permitting additional development. Councilmember Deborah Nelson noted a practical benefit for landowners: if the city completes the EIS and planned action, individual property owners would not each have to fund separate EIS-level studies for their projects, which she said could be costly.
Staff described outreach plans. Parqueys told council the city will hold an open house for all Island Crossing property owners and businesses and will invite council to that meeting. Parqueys also said the planned action will set parameters that allow expedited review for projects within those parameters, and projects outside the parameters would require additional, project-specific environmental review.
No formal council vote on the moratorium extension or on adoption of a planned-action ordinance or EIS was recorded in the provided transcript excerpt. The matter remained in the discussion phase; staff indicated next steps would include the open house and proceeding with the planned-action/EIS process.
For transparency, staff noted this procedural step arose after the sub-area plan work was already under contract and underway and that ordinance language changes associated with other sub-area plans (East Hill and Lindsay) resulted in the need for a planned action and EIS before adoption.
Community members and property owners will be invited to the planned outreach events; staff said projects that do not conform to the planned-action parameters will face project-specific SEPA review and permitting requirements.
