Laserfiche WebLink
1. Does the Planning Commission support planning for future development <br /> beyond the current Urban Growth Boundary? <br /> Commissioner Posson said yes, noting that he thinks it makes sense, in light of the <br /> overall planning area, to look at expanding the UGB. <br /> Commissioner O'Connor stated that if the current UGB is expanded, it would include <br /> more acreage now in the City; and if whatever is outside, including the industrial, is <br /> moved inside, it leaves acreage for the City to meet the RHNA numbers. He added that <br /> moving the UGB farther and farther out would provide more acreage, and the City will <br /> continue to get more and more RHNA numbers at some point because the City has <br /> more acreage. <br /> Chair Blank stated that he does not know how big a movement that is, so he does not <br /> know how much the City would be expanding the UGB or not. <br /> Mr. Dolan replied that it would be less than 140 acres. <br /> Chair Blank indicated that he does not know what impact that would have on the City's <br /> numbers. <br /> Mr. Dolan replied that he does not really think it would have any impact. He explained <br /> that compared to the size of the area in the UGB now and adding that little bit, available <br /> land is a part of the formula, but he did not think there would be a dramatic change. <br /> Chair Blank stated that his view would be that if there were no change, then he does not <br /> have a problem one way or the other. He noted that the question is one person's <br /> dramatic change might be another person's moderate change; so before he would be <br /> able to get a good read, he would need to see the information to know what the impact <br /> of that would be. <br /> Mr. Dolan replied that there is no way to provide it. He explained that in terms of <br /> predicting what the RHNA numbers are going to be based on that movement, he would <br /> just be lying if he said he could tell the Commission what the impact was really going to <br /> be with a number. <br /> Mr. Dolan continued that in line with this topic, there were two reasons why the Task <br /> Force picked that alternative and went in that direction, and where it pretty much came <br /> to a consensus that it could not move out: one was a concern about having enough <br /> development to support the infrastructure demands which are significant, and not <br /> require that to be all put on the backs of housing because it was concerned about <br /> housing numbers; and the second was this area is no garden spot and has a different <br /> look to it, leaving basically scarred landscape there and not the same as the rolling hills <br /> that surround and add to the beauty of the area. <br /> EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 22, 2013 Page 20 of 30 <br />