03/08/1978 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

neighborhood groups and other interested persons to look at what options are available. However, the JHC was not yet studying procedures. They are only looking at ways in which land can be better used. Discussions ~ are scheduled so that neighborhoods will have enough time for input .., and she felt the report would not be ready in less than three months. Ms. Smith felt that Council should probably wait to make its decision and incorporate the JHC findings before its final decision. Mr. Haws felt he was ready to make a decision now, although he was not sure which way Council wished to proceed. If it wished to continue the present policy, he said that decision should be made at this time. Mr. Obie felt that if Council was assuming JHC was going to review the panhandle policies, that was an erroneous assumption. Betty Niven said the JHC would review the standards if the Council so directed. However, its present direction is to present to the Council and Planning Commission the ways in which action could be taken to implement compact urban growth and let the Council and Planning Commission make the determination as to which ways it wishes to go. She said JHC was still continuing on the assumption that the City is committed to the compact urban growth policy. Mr. Obie felt the Panhandle Policy should be continued with adjustment in some of the standards. Also, he wanted to see a subcommittee of those people interested and affected by panhandle lots (such as neighbors) to study what adjustments could be made in standards. Mr. Delay agreed that neighbors would be interested in participating in the decisions to make panhandle lots more attractive. However, he was afraid it was impossible to find a vehicle that would be cost effective ~ and uniformly equitable, objective, and not subjective. In response to Mr. Delay, Mr. Williams said he felt it would never be possible to have uniform standards applied and never unfairly treat anyone. He felt if that were tried, it might end up hurting just as many people as if a value judgment were given. However, he supported the Panhandle Policy in that there is a need for increasing land use in the community. He also sug- gested that perhaps standards could be developed to include architectural assessment of appearance. Mr. Haws summed up the options for Council as being: 1) Eliminate Panhandle Policy; 2) continue with the present policy; and 3) declare a moratorium until a review of standards takes place. Mr. Obie included as another alternative that the Mayor could appoint a committee, subject to Council approval, for a review of standards. Mr. Williams moved, seconded by Mr. Haws, that the City Council request the Mayor to appoint a subcommittee, subject to Council approval, that would be representative of the Council, the Planning Commission, and other interested citizens in the community; the subcommittee would review standards and recommend specific appro- priate changes in the Panhandle Policy; and there would be no moratorium on panhandle lots during the review process. - 3/8/78--6 151.