My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2021 05 13
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2021 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2021 05 13
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/3/2021 11:28:54 AM
Creation date
5/10/2021 8:49:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
5/13/2021
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
1166
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
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />April 8, 2021 <br />Page 7 of 7 <br /> <br />dark-sky situation for existing lights but they may not be perfect. He explained the <br />details of the lighting options available through Excel. <br /> <br />Diehl stated that whatever they could do as a Commission he would support, such as <br />sending a letter up to Council or engaging with other commissions. <br /> <br />Rice asked about in-person meetings. <br /> <br />Council was contemplating discussing that in July. <br /> <br />Brauneis asked how to blow the top off the McCaslin Redevelopment project. <br /> <br />Zuccaro shared that the Comp Plan Update was usually a 1-2 year process and the <br />next one could change policy. He emphasized the importance of aligning balancing <br />community desire with economic reality. <br /> <br />Williams shared that when the town of Superior was trying to get the downtown up-and- <br />running they chose to create their own preliminary PUD and that attracted a developer <br />within a year with huge community input. <br /> <br />Ritchie added more context to the Superior example, sharing that the land was not <br />owned by the City and that it was a greenfield project, which was easier than <br />redevelopment. She agree with Director Zuccaro that the community’s expectations <br />would need to adjust to the market or there needed to be a balance between community <br />and market, and she noted that excluding some land uses made redevelopment even <br />harder. <br /> <br />ITEMS TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR THE MEETING ON MAY 13, 2021 <br />Ritchie stated that the May meeting would likely be quite full and May 20th would be the <br />likely overflow date. <br />Zuccaro and Planner Ritchie reminded the Commission that the first to apply was the <br />first to go on the agenda and shared potential approaches to cutoff times for the May <br />meetings. <br />Dan Mellish stated that he was on the Sustainability Advisory Board and was interested <br />in getting ahead of some of the Redtail Ridge with the public outcry and in observing the <br />Planning Commission. <br />Brauneis thanked Board Member Mellish for attending the meeting. <br /> <br />ADJOURN <br />Rice moved to adjourn. Williams seconded. Meeting adjourned at 8:11 PM.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.