Item 3: Ordinance Concerning Jefferson/Far West Plan Amendments

Home Browse Search

l- LL. <C a:: c residential lands study.showed larger vacant parcels that \vere available for residential development and made assumptions about ho\\' nluch growth could be accommodated on those vacant lands. There ,vere no parcels large enough in the area. in question for them to be included. Responding to Mr. Carron, Ms. Harding understood that a sunset clause that would be \vritten \ into die ordinance would revert the land use designation back to medium density on the Metro Plan and lo\v to medium on" the refinement plan. She added that the phrase historic character was used in tbe written staff response because the JWN \vas not officially designated as historic-. In response to Ms. Kneeland, IvIr. Yeiter explained the hierarchy for approval of the proposed amendments. required consistency \\lith the Metro Plan, thus the Metro Plan needed to be. amended prior to the refinement plan or code amendments.. Responding to Mr.. Hledik) ~1.r. Yeiter confirmed that the City Council established the 2008 sunset date in anticipation that the Planning Commission \\-'Quld have better infill tools in place to insure compatibility of ne\v construction b)! that time.. Refen"ing to the original City Council September II, 2006 motion, Ms. Harding added that further Council action could be to extend the sunset date. Mr. Yeiter, in response to Mr. Carroll, stated the Planning Commission had a history OfUlovillg through the hierarchy of approval of proposed amendtTI.ents in a short tinic span, that is to say, at the same meeting. f\1s. Ilarding, responding the Mr. Hledik, asserted that the action before the Plannin.g Conlnlission \vas a policy decision. The area north of the Amazon channel was not affected by the recent v housekeeping amendments because it was already medium density designation on the Metro Plan diagranl. If the Pla.nning Commission excluded that from its recommendation, an.d recon1111ended that the rest revert to IO\\-t density, the area north of the channel would have the potential to rezone to R-2 \vith site revie\\t overlay on a ca.se..by-case basis as 'R-2 \vascurrently defined. In response to Mr. Belcher, Ms. Harding opined that t\\'o of the properties identified in a M.ay 24, tnemora.ndutn from fv1s. :Nluir to the Cit)! Council, ,vere on the south side of the channel.