CCMIN070196 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Rasmussen indicated the General Plan map illustrates urban development areas within the Spotorno property and in the Happy Valley Area. That is where development would go and the urban growth boundary line includes the medium density and low density residential areas. The urban growth boundary line would not determine where annexation would be allowed; that would still be the property line. Ms. Mohr asked if the City's Sphere of Influence was the boundary for expected future growth of the City. Mr. Rasmussen indicated the Sphere included land to which the City may desire to extend urban services in the future as opposed to the urban growth boundary line, which is the line where development could occur in the future. The open space land Ms. Mohr was talking about would not be developable land because of the terrain and the underlying designation of Public Health and Safety/Open Space. Ms. Mohr wondered if there was any point in having Public Health and Safety/Open Space land within the urban limit line. Mr. Rasmussen indicated there is a considerable amount of open space, for instance along the arroyos, that is within the urban growth boundary line and there may be a number of cases where the City will want to have other open spaces. In short, as far as annexation, the urban growth boundary line would not apply. Ms. Mohr wanted to make sure there was encouragement, not a disincentive, for property owners to want to annex to the City so the City can regulate development. Mr. Tarvet felt that if a property owner had land outside the urban growth boundary line, up on the ridge for example, and wanted to develop the property, it is fair to say that the urban growth boundary line would be a disincentive to annexation. What is good about that, however, is it tells the people what the city has planned for the future in terms of development and Ms. Michelotti inquired about the Little Valley area. Mr. Rasmussen indicated that area has been designated as an exempt area. It is recognized as being beyond the urban growth boundary line, but five acre minimum parcels may be appropriate there based on the ability to acquire infrastructure. It is anticipated the area will have County approval for development. Ms. Michelotti referred to Ms. Mohr's question about having the urban growth boundary line being the same as the property line. She felt the City could still designate an area as open space and thereby protect it from County approvals. 07/01/96 -14-