Agenda - Planning Commission - 04/05/2007

Home

Update process, it is expected that the land use qesignation and associated zoning requirements for the Rural Developing Area will be revisited. . Associate Planner Geisler advised at the November 21, 2006 work session, the City Council directed staff to prepare a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment that wonld change the density and lot requirements i:d. the Rural Developing Area from 1 unit per 2.5 acres to 1 unit per 10 acres. Both draft amendments were brought before the Pl~g Commission at their January 4, 2007 meeting, and a public hearing was held. There was general consensus among the Planning Commissioners and those who spoke at the public hearing that the cluster standards shonld be removed from City Code. There was also general support for going back to the 2.5-acre lot standards that were in place before the cluster ordinance was adopted, rather than going to 10-acre standards (4-in-40), similar to those that are currently in place in the Rural Preserve and Central Rural Reserve. Ms. Geisler stated the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council deny the proposed Comprebensive Plan Amendment, and amend Chapter 9 to eHmln~te the cluster development option and revert to 2.5-acre_Iots in the Rural Developing Area They further recommended that the City Council consider enhancing the performance standards for re-subdivision plans, should the 2.5-acre lot standards go forward. Staff included some possible standards within the 2.5-acre option included with this case. Ms. Geisler advised staff continues to believe there is some merit in changing to 4-in-40 standards for the Rural Developing Area until the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Updste process is complete. However, as noted, there was significant support at the public hearing for reverting to 2.5-acre lot standards, and this was the recommendation ultimately made by the Planning Commission. Ms. Geisler advised if the City Council is inclined to move forward with the 10- . acre lot standards (4-in-40), a Comprehensive Plan Amendment is reqnired and is inclnded with this case. If the City Council is inclined to revert to the 2.5-acre lot standards, then a Comprehensive Plan Amendment is not required, and the proposed amendment should be denied. Mayor Gamec commented there has been all kinds of different input in regards to the lot size standards. They tried the cluster ordinance and found that didn't work well, and the Council looked at the moratorium to allow time to come up with a decision. The moratorium and file adoption of the new Comprehensive Plan will give them a chance to look at this. There will be quite a few work sessions and meetings, and this will be discussed with the citizens. Councilmember Olson stated the Council has beat'crround this bush every which way. If they go _to the 10 acres in effect, the end result would extend the moratorium. She agrees with the 2 Y2 acre lot size. . Councilmemher Strommen stated she was originally in favor of the 1 in 10, and she understands what staff is saying in the merits of providing time for the Comprehensive Plan. But in listening to the Planning Commission and hearing the recommendation of the Planning Commission, she believes going back to the 2-Y2: acre lot is probably the right thing to do in the public process. The City wants to set the tone for public input with this Comprehensive Plan, and it sends the wrong message after all they have heard in support for 2-Y:z acres to put that aside and go with the 4 in 40. She favors 2-Y:z acre lot size with standards and looking at the re-subdivis~on plans. . City Council! Jannary 23, 2007 Page 12 of 28 PH