Laserfiche WebLink
7. Evaluate the Zeolite Retail Parcel. Disclaimer: this question was worded incorrectly. <br /> The intent of the question was to determine whether the City should consider a change <br /> from retail to residential based on actual developer interest and challenges as a retail pad <br /> side. This question will be reviewed, considered, and resolved throughout any potential <br /> amendment to the plan. However, as worded and based on a response, there appears to be <br /> a desire to retain the retail vision. Evaluation does not necessarily mean a plan change <br /> will occur. <br /> 8. Continue Discussion on Sign Regulations. There appears to be some hesitation in <br /> allowing 75-foot-tall advertising signs (result of the grade-separated interchange), while <br /> also a showing of those that desire to allow for them. <br /> 9. Generally Maintain the Vision for Shared Parking Strategies. A majority of <br /> respondents indicated that we should retain the vision to require shared, potentially <br /> structured parking in the downtown district and there is appetite to consider financial <br /> tools in order to facilitate this vision. The intent would be to reduce the amount of surface <br /> parking where warranted and underutilized. <br /> 10. Establish Architectural Review Committee. There appears to be a desire to re-establish <br /> an Architectural Review Committee, so long as it does not slow down the review process. <br /> 11. Build Upon Existing Natural Resource Policies and Consider Additional Best <br /> Management Practices. The City appears to be doing fairly well on protecting natural <br /> resources, with some room for improvement and growth. <br /> Community Development Director Gladhill stated the potential next steps are as follows: <br /> 1. Broader Citizen Engagement? A key discussion topic in developing this survey was <br /> public involvement due to the high level of involvement in previous iterations of the plan. <br /> The City did hold a public workshop to gather ideas; however, attendance was low and <br /> feedback was minimal. While this feedback provided a lot of good information, the <br /> format did not engage as many of the pubic as Staff desired. Staff would recommend <br /> using remaining City events, such as Happy Days and The Draw Event Series, to provide <br /> opportunities to submit ideas and review any potential amendments to the plan in addition <br /> to standard processes. <br /> 2. Broader Stakeholder Engagement? Similar to above, Staff would like to engage property <br /> owners impacted by the current plan and any potential amendments. Staff would like to <br /> review the results of this survey with stakeholders for feedback. Staff would present a <br /> simplified version of this survey for these stakeholders. <br /> 3. Direct the Planning Commission to develop a revised Development Plan for The COR. <br /> This step only needs to be as in depth as needed. It is possible that amendments only need <br /> to go so far to provide clarity that appears to be currently lacking in the plan. As noted <br /> previously, Staff also desires to simplify design requirements to make the document <br /> easier for all to navigate and comprehend. Plan Amendments would also be reviewed by <br /> all City policy boards that participated in the survey. <br /> Planning Commission/August 4, 2016 <br /> Page 5 of 7 <br />