PC 04/08/1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

A motion was made by Commissioner Barker that the committee be set up similar to the Growth Management Committee, which was viewed by the City Council to be fair, but instead of four developers, there should be four proponents of the referendum and that people with the potential for major financial benefit shall not be voting members of the committee. Chair Cooper asked how it would be fair for a property owner to be able to participate in a study but have no say as to what will happen with their own property. He, therefore, cannot support the motion. Commissioner Barker noted for the record that the committee should have major representation by the proponents of the referendum because that is the reason we are here. She stated if the committee is not made up this way, then it will just be referended again. Commissioner Wright feels the make-up of the Committee should be determined by the City Council, but that the committee should be residents who live in the affected areas. Commissioner Barker pointed out that Danbury Park is not included in the study area, although some of the residents expressed an interest in serving on the committee. Chair Cooper stated that the committee should include representation from the neighborhood property owners, from the gravel companies, and from the City. Commissioner Wright suggested that the study not exceed six months. However, Commissioner Kumaran feels that placing a time limit on the study could impact the quality of the study. After further discussion, the Commission agreed that aone-year time limit be put on the proposed study. A motion was made by Commissioner Wright, seconded by Chair Cooper, recommending that the City Council use its discretion in selecting or determining the make-up of the committee (people the City Council sees as stakeholders to study the proposed area and that the study be completed in a reasonable time frame not to exceed one year. ROLL CALL VOTE AYES: Commissioners Barker, Dove, Wright and Chair Cooper NOES: Commissioner Kumaran ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Commissioner Kumaran noted for the record that the reason we are going through this entire process is because of the referendum. He feels that a committee without the majority being controlled by the proponents of the referendum would not accomplish anything. b. Review of Growth Management Ordinance Brian Swift gave a history of the Growth Management Program. He noted that the staff report outlines the history of the committee and the consensus process that it went through. He also noted that Chair _ Cooper suggested a quicker way to get to 350 units per year, which would start in the year 2000 and then drop down to 300 units at a future time. In addition, Mr. Swift stated that staff has prepared an updated Planning Commission Page 10 April 8, 1998