CCMIN080696 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Dennis felt Council had wanted to stay away from a specific number and she recommended leaving the wording as is. Program 11.2. Land Use Element Ms. Mohr asked why the City would extend services into a non-urban or non-residential Mr. Roush believed the idea might be that the City would extend certain urban services for recreational uses, e.g. Shadow Cliffs. The question raised with respect to the term "non- urban" refers to a light industrial or warehouse use, which is non-residential, but may not fall under the definition of non-urban. In that case, would the City be interested in changing non- urban to non-residential, so the opportunity of extending certain services would be greater than simply saying non-urban. That is a policy choice of the Council. Ms. Mohr asked if the area were currently annexed. If not, the City would be extending services beyond the city limits. Mr. Rasmussen indicated the area eventually would be annexed. The original purpose of the exception was so a permanent urban growth boundary line would not be established in the __ quarry land area until after a major comprehensive study of the area. We would not know where the line would go until after a study. The subcommittees, the Steering Committee and the Planning Commission recommended that before land uses and the urban growth boundary line be adopted that the area should be studied at a future comprehensive General Plan Update which may be ten years in the future. The intent was to put the decision off until then. Mr. Tarver stated that if the urban growth boundary is put on the ballot and approved by the voters, to extend it to there would have to be another vote. Mr. Roush agreed that was true for the boundary itself. What is at issue now is to allow certain urban services to be extended beyond the urban growth boundary under limited circumstances. Staff is asking for clarification with respect to the reclaimed land and whether to allow services for non-urban uses, which is more restrictive than non-residential. Mr. Tarver supported the term non-urban development. Ms. Mohr felt this area is inconsistent with the rest of the General Plan. Because the uses for the area are unknown, the urban limit boundary will not be set until the study is done. Mr. Rasmussen indicated the urban growth boundary would be established now, but in the future the area is to be studied and as part of the study there will be consideration as to whether to change the location of the UGB. 08/06/96 -24-