Laserfiche WebLink
Attachment B <br />Commissioner Gitzen opined that the PUD was an important tool for the City Council; and <br />allowed consideration of a variety of options and some sensitivity for particular <br />sites. Commissioner Gitzen opined tha� the PUD process should provide for land uses and <br />density variations as the community redeveloped and moved ahead. <br />Chair Boguszewski also agreed with the need for strong public outreach upfront to make sure of <br />a transparent, consistent process and application of standards to avoid misperceptions as often <br />found in the past. <br />Councilmember McGehee agreed with Councilmember Willmus' statement about creativity; <br />opining that often with rigid planning it seemed that only the City or its staff had really good <br />ideas; while this could open the City up to other ideas and diverse projects. <br />When the City Council first started considering this, Councilmember Willmus noted it was <br />specifically under the context of residential applications or uses; however, the more he <br />considered it, he was now finding himself looking citywide to address future questions. <br />Mayor Roe agreed with a citywide consideration and opined that the Conditional Use was not a <br />bad tool, but that it really was most applicable specifically to allowing a particular type of use, <br />with conditions, and could not be used very well as a tool for flexibility beyond just the type of <br />use on the site. Mayor Roe opined the PUD provided a more flexible tool to deal with multiple <br />issues broader than a Conditional Use permit; and while he was initially opposed to reopening <br />the PUD process, he was now coming around. <br />Mayor Roe thanked the Planning Commission for their attendance tonight, their ongoing good <br />work, and their input for this discussion. <br />Mr. Gozola thanked the City Council and Planning Commission for this joint meeting, and the <br />helpful feedback it provided him. <br />