AgdaPkt 2002-10-28 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

The Ordinance amendment sets very few definite standards. It leaves the City Council with great discretion with regard to the content of plans. However, one standard that was found in all other cities ordinances and which the staff and Planning Commission discussed was minimum plan area. The proposal before Council sets the minimum area at one-quarter of an acre. Some of the other cities using the Precise Plan model set a larger minimum area. Staff and the Commission, however, recommend the one-quarter acre size because it is small enough to enable the Precise Plan tool to be used in areas with small parcels, such as Downtown. Yet the minimum eliminates the very smallest proposals, where small size leaves very little design discretion. The City will learn by experience as it applies this new planning tool. If approved, we will formally review the ordinance after the first year of operation, to evaluate what works and what does not. Chronology The Planning Commission reviewed an eady draft of this Ordinance amendment on July 2, 2002. Staffthen made further refinements tothe document and broughtthe amendment and the CEQA negative declaration back to the Commission on September 10, 2002. At this meeting the Planning Commission certified the negative declaration and unanimously recommended the amendment to the City Council. Fiscal Impact If the City initiates or approves the initiation of Precise Plans, there will be a cost associated with the use of internal staff time or the hiring of consultants. Conclusion This Ordinance is recommended to you by staff and by a unanimous vote of the Planning Commission. It will provide a valuable new tool for the City to use in its planning efforts into the future. Michael Church "Bruce L~edstrand Ed Everett Planning & Redevelopment Manager Community Development City Manager Services Manager Attachments 1. Ordinance 2. Copy of Mountain View's Downtown Precise Plan 4