Laserfiche WebLink
Assistant Community Development Director Trudgeon reiterated City Enaineer Jankowski will <br />need to review the calculations and see what else is needed. <br /> <br />Commissioner Brauer asked the engineer if he was comfortable with the pon~ eXPanSion. <br /> <br /> :: <br />Mr. Livgard stated if that is what is needed they are fine with it. He indicated if the:pond was <br />desi~med with this type of use in mind. it may not need to be expanded. ::' .....: <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Van Scoy, seconded by CommissiOner J:e~ey to continue the <br />for sketch plan review or TSM Development and Site Plan: Review of CNP S-torage to the July <br />2004 Planning Commission meeting. ~ <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Vice Chairperson: johnson, Commissioners Van Scoy, Jeffrey, <br />Brauer, Shepherd, and Watson. Voting No: None. Absent: Chairp:ef~°n Nixt. <br /> <br />Case #5 Review Draft Language for the R-1 Rural Deyeloping District <br /> <br />Associate Planner Geisler advised at their May 11, 2004 meeting:the..city 7COuncil adopted a 90- <br />day moratorium on all subdiviSiiOn: and platting in the R-1 Rural:::D%eloping District. She <br />indicated the moratorium is effecti:ve June: t4, 2004 through Septem¢~r i2, 2004, and the purpose <br />of the moratorium is to provide time for the planning Commission 'and City Council to consider <br />additional development standards for the Rural Dex;el'oPing. District. She indicated the Planning <br />Commission held its first discussion of the standards at the June 4, 2004 meeting. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Geisler explained that based on. discussion, Staff has prepared a draft <br />amendment to 9.20.11 - R- 1 Residential District. She indicated the purpose of this amendment is <br />to define additional standards for the Rural Developing Area and describe additional information <br />that will be required for new developments in, this area. She stated that as written, the ordinance <br />would require clustering of the number of:nnits currently permitted under the 2.5-acre density <br />requirement. She advised Staff is. suggesting applying the R-1 Urban bul~ standards to the Rural <br />Developing Area. She further advised that as written, all new subdivisions v,;ould need to meet the <br />new standards, regardless of lot size, and there would be no exception for simpte lot splits. She <br />stated parcels that are five acres or larger would be eligible for subdivision under the new <br />requirements, as is the case under the current code. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Geisler advised the draft ordinance only applies to new development in the <br />Rural Developing Area; however Staff would like the Planning Commission to consider applying <br />these new standards to the Central Rural Reserve Area and the Rural Preserve Area, and possibly <br />making a recormnendation to the City Council. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Geisler stated the new subdivisions in the Rural Developing Area would still go <br />before the Park and Recreation Commission for recommendation on park dedication, and would <br />still be subject to current Park and Trail requirements. She indicated with regard to density <br />transition, proposed subdivisions would still need to meet the requirements when new units are <br />proposed adjacent to existing homes. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/July 1, 2004 <br /> Page 7 of 12 <br /> <br />107 <br /> <br /> <br />