My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2013 05 07
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2013 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2013 05 07
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:44:33 PM
Creation date
5/22/2013 8:49:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
5/7/2013
Original Hardcopy Storage
7D4
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2013 05 07
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City Council <br />Meeting Minutes <br />May 7, 2013 <br />Page 7 of 16 <br />stated the small area plans will provide the opportunity for continued public participation <br />in future developments. She supported the Plan and felt it was a plan for the future. <br />Mayor Muckle offered the following revisions: Fiscal policy statements and the <br />Marginal Cost Model: He proposed a sentence "the City should develop a marginal cost <br />model" - Adding "New developments, re- developments or annexations must have a <br />positive effect on the City's fiscal and economic position especially in areas that were <br />historically, commercial or retail oriented ". South of Cherry, he suggested language <br />"residential may be allowed east of McCaslin in projects of exceptional quality with <br />exceptionally strong fiscal benefits to the City ". He proposed striking "mixed use" in the <br />introduction to the framework portion for the McCaslin corridor. <br />Council member Sackett stated the Council has spent a lot of time analyzing the <br />Comprehensive Plan and voiced his support. <br />Council member Loo was comfortable with the language Mayor Muckle added to the <br />Comprehensive Plan. She supported the Plan as proposed. <br />Council member Yarnell stated she struggles with a plan without real numbers. <br />Although she supported the small area plans, she suggested some language be added <br />concerning the densities. Council member Loo asked if it was legal to down zone. <br />City Attorney Light stated the answer would depend on the circumstance; the <br />Comprehensive Plan is a planning document and does not act as a rezoning document. <br />Mayor Muckle stated the Comprehensive Plan is a visionary document. <br />Planning Director Russ stated the framework plan sets the maximums from a planning <br />perspective. He addressed the fiscal and infrastructure analysis, which looks at the <br />development within the small area plans and forecasts the ability to support those <br />projections. <br />Council member Yarnell wondered if the small area planning could address the option <br />to reduce the numbers presented as opposed to what is currently allowed. <br />Council member Keany inquired whether there is a definition of the small area plans <br />process. Planning Director Russ stated the introduction to the small area plans <br />provides the standards and guidelines. <br />Council member Loo stated there is adequate protection in the Comprehensive Plan <br />language which gives everyone flexibility in the future. <br />Planning Director Russ referred to the specific language, which provides guidance for <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.