09/12/1979 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I . I VI. GROWTH STUDY Mr. Farah, Planning Department, reviewed the September 12 memo to the City e Manager providing a brief summary of points made during the September 10 public testimony on the proposed modifications to Chapter 3 of the City's Community Goals and Policies Document. It summarized the seven major points made at that meeting. From those suggestions, he said that staff would be prepared to bring back, in legislative format, any changes that Council wishes to see effected. Councilors then began a review of Attachment B, Chapter 3--Growth Manage- ment (As Proposed for Revision). Pol icy 1b: Mr. Delay wondered if the word "should" was an operative word. Mr. Farah said that Council action would be to adopt the goals and policies and recognize the proposals. Policy 2: Mr. Delay said he would like to put an asterisk by it which indicates it should receive priority status for implementation. Ms. Miller agreed, and also felt that "various growth management techniques" should read "various growth rate management techniques." That detailed sort of analysis has not been made public and she would like to see it as a part of the emphasis of this recommendation. She also felt some uneasi- ness with Footnote 1 which says, "There appears to be a widespread, though not universal, sentiment that a growth management program should be adopted . . . . " She feels that sentiment occurs all through the document anyway. She feels that statement would give an undue negative emphasis. Mr. Delay added that work needs to begin on a systematic analysis of the e techniques and Council could make a strong statement that they support getting on with this analysis. Mr. Lieuallen suggested that the beginning sentence should read that the City "shall" instead of "should," or some similar word which indiates the beginning steps of a process will take place. It was understood that an asterisk would be placed by Policy 2 and that Footnote 1 would be included with that paragraph, rather than as a footnote. Policy 3: Mr. Obie wondered about "minimum overall density." He thought density was dealt with in maximums. Mr. Farah answered it was in regard to planned unit developments where the Planning Commission had envisioned a higher density than actually came about. He added it would deal mostly with new development. Po 1 icy 3b ( 1 ) : "Duplexes and triplexes should be allowed on outsize lots (see d3)." Mr. Obie thinks it is important to get on with this issue and adopt the concept suggested in this policy, and he wished to offer amend- ments. He suggested adding the word "appropriate" before the words "outsize lots." He then referred to Section d(3). After the word "privacy," - 9/12/79--4 510