_Minutes_August 25, 2021 - Laserfiche WebLink

Sites Criteria (Categories 4) — Environmental Impacts/Hazards Commissioner Allen suggested one point, rather than four, for properties not in a hazard zone under Item 4e. Chair Brown agreed and stated he felt it was overweighted. Commissioner Pace was amenable as well. Sites Criteria (Categories 5) — Impacts on Sensitive Resources There were no comments from the Commissioners related to Item 5. Sites Criteria (Categories 6) — Height and Mass Compatibility Chair Brown expressed appreciation for three stories being spelled out in 6a. Commissioner Nibert questioned the Housing Commission's suggestion to exclude housing development across the street and stated he was uncertain of the purpose. Ms. Clark stated the criteria was related to neighborhood streets, and arterial streets would not be included since they were typically much wider. Commissioner Allen with Commissioner Nibert agreed that if it was intended for neighborhood streets, then they were fine with the criteria as written. Sites Criteria (Categories 7) — Interest in Site Chair Brown suggested adding criteria regarding vacant and underutilized properties to this category, versus Category 1 as previously suggested. The Commission concurred. Commissioner Nibert inquired about recycled water. Ms. Clark explained purple pipe and recycled water and the environmental impact of non-potable water — this item had been suggested by the Housing Commission. Ms. Hagen discussed the development requirement to connect to purple pipe. Commissioner Allen suggested adding a criterion regarding purple pipe. By straw vote, the Commission agreed to add such criteria. Housing Commission Comments: Chair Brown referenced the proximity to services/amenities and the criteria of increasing Middle School radius to one mile, similar to High Schools, and stated he thought it was appropriate for older students, but not for elementary or middle school-aged students. Commissioner Pace stated he was not supportive of the criteria. Chair Brown discussed school capacity and enrollment due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Ms. Clark discussed the school districts methodology for determining figures in relation to the Housing Element and agreed it would likely be helpful to consider capacity over several years, since it tended to fluctuate. Commissioner Allen agreed with the Housing Commission's suggestion regarding significant trees. Ms. Clark commented that it may be difficult to provide an objective standard here, since specific tree counts, number of heritage trees would not be known for individual sites. Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 of 10 August 25, 2021 ps a one-third mile radius as a compromise. Three Commissioners concurred with staff's suggestion, by straw vote. Sites Criteria (Categories 3) — Proximity to Services and Amenities Commissioner Allen asked about adding a point for sites near major job centers. Ms. Clark explained that the data to determine employment numbers for a job center or business park would be difficult to obtain, and thus did not recommend its inclusion. Commissioner Allen was amenable to adding that criteria in Round 2. Commissioner Pace stated he was also amenable to Ms. Clark's recommendation. Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 of 10 August 25, 2021 She stated the State recognized that the City should determine the most appropriate locations for housing. Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 of 10 August 25, 2021 irmed there were 600 replies to the housing survey and inquired if any related to selection criteria. Ms. Clark stated the survey questions offered the opportunity to comment on preferred and specific locations. Chair Brown suggested the survey results be provided prior to final decisions. Ms. Clark suggested the criteria be determined based on guiding principles and the survey results would be available well before the matter comes back before the Planning Commission. Chair Brown mentioned the Housing Commission's comments and Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 10 August 25, 2021