Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mr. Bradley moved seconded by Mr. Keller to refer the recommenda~ <br />tion on No. 2 to the Planning Commission for discussion in joint <br />session with the Councl1 when the recommendation on No. I is <br />considered. <br /> <br />Comm <br />3/26/75 <br />Approve <br /> <br />-- <br /> <br />Mr. Bradley said the two were interrelated and one could not be discussed with~ <br />out discussion of the other. Also, he felt adequate information was lacking <br />on which to make a decision. Mr. Keller said his second was based on the <br />implication that this had a high priority. He felt its priority should be <br />a matter of discussion with the Planning Commission.- <br /> <br />Vote was taken on motion to refer. Motion carried, all Council <br />members present voting aye, except Councilwoman Beal voting no. <br /> <br />3. L&B Recommenation 5 - lInnexation of Goodpasture Island and preparation of <br />development plan for that area, limiting commercial use to area south of <br />gravel ponds and to the existing community shopping center (K-Mart), the <br />remaining portion to be used for residen~ial neighborhood. <br /> <br />The Planning Commission recommended that the Council immediately <br />proceed with initiation of annexation proceedings; preparation, <br />of a development plan with regard to land uses and services' essen- <br />tial to those uses, this plan to be reveiwed by the Planning Com- <br />mission in April 1975; completion of review of the development plan <br />by the Commission and Council by June 1975 so it can be included in <br />the annual update of the General Plan; and proceed with rezoning <br />following adoption of the development plan and its inclusion in the <br />General Plan. <br /> <br />Mr. Chenkin noted that if the Council agreed with the Planning Commission's e <br />recommendation for initiation of annexation, it should proceed through normal <br />annexation procedures - public hearing before the Commission, referral of recom- <br />mendation after that hearing to the Council, and subsequent referral to the <br />Boundary Commission if ~ccepted. <br /> <br />Mr. Keller moved seconded by Mr. Hamel to refer the Commission's <br />recommendation on Recommendation No. 5 to the Planning Commission <br />for discussion in joint session with Council on Nos. I and 2. <br /> <br />Discussion followed on how soon a joint session could be scheduled, intent of <br />acceptance of the recommendation (makes no commitment on annexation, merely <br />starts procedure at Planning Commission level), staff work to begin on refine- <br />ment study, etc. <br /> <br />Vote was taken on the motion to refer, and the Chair declared tpe <br />motion defeated. <br /> <br />Mi. Hamel moved seconded by Mrs. Beal to accept the Commission's <br />recommendation on No.5. <br /> <br />Mr. Bradley moved seconded by Mr. Haws to defer action on <br />the recommendation until next committee meeting to give the <br />opportunity for more information from staff. <br /> <br />In making the motion Mr. Bradley said formal action on the annexation <br />issue wouldn't be taken until the April 14 Council meeting anyway. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Vote was taken on motion to defer. Motion defeated, Council <br />members Keller,' Bradley, and Haws voting aye; Council members <br />Murray, Hamel, Beal voting no. <br /> <br />4/14/75 - 16 <br /> <br />'(O~ <br />