2005_1114_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

City Council Regular Meeting —1Q/24/Q5 DRAFT Minutes - Page 23 Further discussion ensued regarding specific direction to staff. Council consensus appeared to focus on practical issues within Title 11 related to subdivisions (:i.e., lot size, shape and density; identification of portions of the code being impacted; language of moratorium ordinance itself — not too broad, but broad enough; platting procedures; major and minor subdivisions to minimum lot sizes; flag lots; policies to preserve and a review of those policies; residential, rather than commer��a�. zoning considerations); preservation of large lots; and the specific issue that current ordinance language allows that ten homes can be built in the middle of a neighborhood, changing the entire character; and what needs to be amended in the process to avoid these situations. Councilmember Maschka opined that he was not concerned with Planned Unit Developments (PUD's} where density issues could be addressed. Mr. Paschke sought additional clarification, noting that the Council concerns were not subdivision issues; but zoning and Comprehensive Plan concerns and its guiding principles; and redevelopment of residential areas related to density and division of existing areas with diverse residential types. City Attorney Anderson clarified that the City Council was seeking to curtail development while they performed a study, opining that the study may prove more in depth and complicated than the Council was anticipating, but was asking staff to advise them of the issues they needed to consider for such a study. Further discussion included the 60-day review period for Planning Case 3665. Mayor Klausin�; opined that the law doesn't always permit the City Council to do the popular thing; and expressed his concerns. Councilmember Ihlan opined her support of attempting to study a 40+ year old policy to determine if the policy was still consistent with goals.