02/15/1978 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

people to share the responsibility in reducing the demands and costs of city government growing too fast and in peripheral areas. He felt as elected public officials, the Council had to address the general public good. He sugge~ted that neighborhoods enter into private cove- nants and agreements to protect their neighborhoods if they so wished. However, he felt the City should not start changing its overall com- prehensive planning for the protection of particular individuals. - Mr. Cooley suggested if Council were going to review the panhandle policy, that it declare a moratorium until that review is completed. Mr. Lieuallen felt it was a density issue and not a specific considera- tion for the Willakenzie area. He noted in some parts of town, such as the central core area, the density problem had been addressed and accepted, whereas other parts of town were now just becoming aware of it. He said in appeals on the panhandle policy, he had heard that some were not opposed to the policy in general, but they would prefer the pOlicy to apply only to the central area or away from their particular neighborhoods. He said the central core area faced the same problem of wanting it to be attractive and a decent place to live. He felt any review undertaken by Council should address the problems of making the areas attractive, solving traffic problems, but not throw the panhandle policy out. He said if the citizens did not want density to increase, the ultimate answer would be to have no growth in the City. He felt there was no justifica- tion for people saying the policy should occur in any place but their own neighborhoods. Mr. Obie felt there should be some alternatives to the policy, noting ~ the people who are most highly impacted are the people next door to a ,., panhandle lot. He wanted to look at potential alternatives. Ms. Smith noted a tour would be most helpful for Council and that a review should be undertaken. Mr. Haws did not see anything wrong with the panhandle policy as such, as it seems to be an acceptable land-use tool. However, he did not feel it to be acceptable at this time, as people simply do not want it. He was not sure he was prepared to continue supporting the policy. However, if Council decided to discontinue the panhandle policy, then it should address itself to the consequences which might result in annexation and higher density elsewhere. He said the public should be made aware that there would have to be a trade-off. He suggested perhaps the policy could be modified to apply only to new areas or those not now surrounded by other houses. He requested staff information on this modification. He expressed concern in areas where panhandle policy had been in existence for some time, noting there are many people moving from those areas as they find them unsuitable for living. Also he requested staff to respond if Council decides to change the panhandle policy, what could be done to those areas already adversely affected by the policy. He also requested more information from the staff regarding the assessment policy on pan- handle lots. He expressed interest in a public hearing on the issue, saying he would also like staff input as to how to manage the land-use technique. e 2/15/78--6 ,: 101