PC Minutes 6/26/06

ITEM NO. 4: HIERARCHY OF PLANS (MJL)

Consider adoption of Hierarchy of Plans.

STAFF PRESENTATION

Ms. Leininger introduced the item, a chart outlining different types of plans and the general elements making up each kind of plan. She explained revisions made per discussion at the January 2006 meeting, including:

• Common steps are broken out on the description sheets
• A comprehensive plan description sheet has been added
• Information about water shed, neighborhood and sub-basin plans have been tweaked

Staff was asked to respond to the suggestions from the League of Women Voters. Ms. Leininger said Staff had no objection to revising language about water sheds as proposed, but there was some concern about including language about neighborhood plans for areas that did not have an existing Neighborhood Association. She explained that the boundaries of the neighborhood plan were defined by and conformed to the boundaries of the neighborhood association. Without an association, there was no clear way to define the needed plan boundaries.

Haase asked for examples of similar actions, asking what legal weight this document would carry. Ms. Stogsdill referenced the development policy adopted to regulate what parties paid for street improvements.

PUBLIC HEARING

No member of the public spoke on this item.

COMMISSION DISCUSSION

Burress said the League’s point about the need for a detailed list of elements found in each kind of plan was well taken, but he did not feel this document was the appropriate place to list those details.

ACTION TAKEN

Motioned by Lawson, seconded by Erickson to adopt the Hierarchy of Plans as presented.

Motioned by Burress to amend the motion on the floor to include the language regarding water sheds as proposed by the League of Women Voters to and to revise the definition of a neighborhood plan to state:

“Plans that encompass a specific established neighborhood association, or an area that could be covered by a neighborhood association. If a neighborhood association exists, the boundaries of the neighborhood plan shall conform to those of the neighborhood association. If no neighborhood association exists, the boundaries of the neighborhood plan shall be defined using other methods.”

DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION

Staff expressed concern about allowing for initiation of a neighborhood plan in areas where no neighborhood association was present to define the plan boundaries. Burress said this was intentional. Eichhorn commented that the CPC was currently working on the question of, “What is a neighborhood and how are its boundaries defined?”

ACTION TAKEN

Motion on the floor was to amend the original motion to revise identified sections of text as suggested by the League of Women Voters.

The amendment was accepted without objection.

Motion on the floor was to adopt the Hierarchy of Plans as presented by Staff, with revisions to the language regarding water shed plans and neighborhood plans as discussed, and forwarding the documents to the City Commission and Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation for their concurrence.

Motion carried unanimously, 9-0.