Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Report on Comprehensive Plan Focus Group Recommendations <br />Decernber29.1997 <br /> <br />Issue 7 - MUSA Expansion - Should MUSA be expanded for residential development? Where <br />should it expand? Should it have to require a referendum? (Current charter requires a referendum) <br /> <br />ISSUES RESOLUTION <br /> <br />Meetings #3 and #4 focused on issues resolution. The following represents a summary of the <br />degree to which issues were or were not resolved. <br /> <br />Issue 1 - Residential Growth - Focus Group agreed on "well planned" growth having the following <br />characteristics: <br /> <br />. Blends in with existing development <br />. Is in balance with infrastructure and services <br />. Minimizes impact on existing development (cost, safety, traffic impacts) <br />. Is consistent with the natural resource base (water, wetlands, and trees) <br /> <br />Issue 2 - Density of Population - The Focus Group postulated a solution which includes the <br />following elements: <br /> <br />. Overall density in the range of one unit per two to five-acres (several scenarios to be <br />evaluated including gross density with and without wetlands). <br />. Minimum rural lot size: based on a sustainable lot size for septic systems. <br />. Density should be relative to what is next door. Even inside MUSA, at the outer edge, <br />density should be compatible and/or consistent with development adjacent to and outside <br />of MUSA <br />. Urban densities allowable within MUSA <br /> <br />Issue 3 - Housina Diversitv - The Focus Group agreed on the following solution: <br /> <br />. Diversity is okay if the transitionlblending principle is adhered to which makes new <br />development consistent with existing development. <br />. Home size and cost diversity should be allowed. <br />. No mobilehomes should be allowed. <br />. Minimum home size with garages should be required. <br /> <br />Issue 4 - MUSA Expansion - The Focus Group unanimouslv supported the following: <br /> <br />. MUSA expansion is acceptable for commercial and industrial development <br />. MUSA expansion should not create costs for existing rural residential owners unless they <br />want services. <br />. Generally, MUSA expansion is acceptable westerly along Highway 10. <br /> <br />The Focus Group could not agree unanimously with the following: <br /> <br />. Expansion allowable for petitioners who want services and are adjacent to the MUSA <br />boundary. <br />. Support of a planning rather than referendum approach for MUSA expansion. <br /> <br />Page 2 <br />