Item
11-A
Planning Commission Meeting: January 4, 2006
TO: Honorable Planning Commission
FROM: Planning Staff
SUBJECT: Addendum to the Draft Alternatives, Common
Elements, Performance Indicators, Measures, and Public Outreach Program
Associated with the Land Use and Circulation Elements Project
INTRODUCTION
Last
month the Planning Commission continued this item to the subject hearing date.
In doing so, the Commission requested additional information regarding the
Status Quo Alternative, the No Growth Scenario Analysis and the anticipated
public outreach component. This report expands on these three points and is
intended to supplement the documentation previously submitted to the Planning
Commission.
DISCUSSION
The
next step in the General Plan Update process is to define various future land
use alternatives in order to analyze them and compare future consequences of
policy decisions made today. The
alternatives should be selected for their ability to test out and inform the
community about possible choices. This report together with the previous
report, provides a conceptual approach to defining and studying these
alternatives that will inform community debate and dialogue and ultimately
assist in settling upon final land use and circulation goals. These draft
concepts, including the public outreach program are malleable and are expected
to be refined based on the Planning Commission’s and City Council’s comments.
The Status Quo Alternative
One
of the four alternatives presented to the Planning Commission for further study
is the Status Quo approach. This is included in order to understand the likely
consequences of continuing with existing policy, land uses and regulations for the
community over the next twenty years based on past trends and expected reuse of
land. The purpose of studying this alternative is to enable a clear comparison
between the extension of current practice and development and new policy
decisions and plans. This comparison will help determine how to best serve the
community’s vision as articulated in the Emerging Themes.
The
Status Quo Alternative represents an extension of existing trends, land uses
and programs that address circulation and land use policy over the next twenty
years. While it retains existing development thresholds, it is not likely to
result in a full realization or build out of the current Land Use Element or
even development that maximizes height or floor area allowed by existing
standards. Neither the Status Quo nor other alternatives will be evaluated
based on full build out potential, but rather some percentage thereof that
represents a likely development under each alternative.
Nevertheless,
it is anticipated with this alternative that there will continue to be an
unlimited demand for housing, including affordable housing, little demand for
office, and little to no demand for industrial uses. Pressure to develop in the
industrial zone will persist as available land resources diminish elsewhere in
the City. Concerns regarding circulation, traffic and parking will remain
largely the same and addressed with existing policies serving as a mechanism to
help mitigate stated concerns. Land uses and patterns as well as development
pace will continue as they have for the last 10 to 20 years, with newer housing
concentrated downtown and five to ten unit condominiums developed in existing
residential neighborhoods. The commercial corridors will not generate a
significant amount of housing, but will continue to support local and regional serving
retail and office needs.
Each
alternative and analysis will be more fully presented in a workbook to help
stimulate a community dialogue on these different policy approaches. A range of
issues will be considered, including evaluation of the Common Elements and
Options and information on how circulation policies would be used to support
possible land use proposals. The intent with the Draft Alternatives is to first
understand if staff and the consultant are heading in the right direction,
recognizing that the each alternative may include aspects that are supported or
outright rejected by some members of the community. It is not expected that one
of the three alternatives alone will advance toward the preferred alternative,
but that hybrid of these and other ideas may form the framework to draft long
range circulation and land use goals.
No Growth Scenario
It
remains staff’s intent to evaluate the implications of a No Growth Scenario consistent
with the Planning Commission’s request several months ago in addition to the
three alternatives that are ultimately selected for further study. As
previously mentioned, staff and consultant will compile information and explain
the physical, cultural, economic, and legal implications associated with this
policy, including an assessment of impacts to population diversity, property
values and housing affordability, impacts to the local economy and possible
litigation challenges.
The
workbook will include an analysis of this approach that is less comprehensive
than the more detailed Alternatives discussions but which will be sufficient to
enable the community to evaluate no growth policies in relationship to other
alternatives and to weigh the pros and cons of each.
Proposed Public Outreach
The
initial public outreach effort informed the community of the City’s effort to
update the Land Use and Circulation Elements and received a significant amount
of information from a broad cross section of the community as to the issues
that will be important to carry forward over the next twenty years. This part
of the process was documented in the Emerging Themes Report. Staff and
consultant then used this information and compiled other technical data that
will be useful in the Alternatives phase of the project. The purpose of this
next outreach effort is to focus input on specific issues, policies, and
geographic areas, to understand trade offs among policy choices, and to arrive
at a consensus-based preferred alternative.
To
this end, the Planning and Community Development Department will host a series
of approximately five citywide study sessions or workshops focused on
particular issues. Rather than staff
attending the meetings of community groups and organizations, members of the
community will be invited to attend these citywide meetings in order to
generate understanding and dialogue about citywide issues among and between
various community sectors and neighborhoods.
Community
meetings will be structured to present various policy options at a program
level and to create dialogue about the implications or trade-offs of certain
decisions. This dialogue will lead to the formation of practical land use and
circulation goals to be the basis of a preferred plan. The first meeting, to be
scheduled in late February or March, will focus on orienting participants to
the workbook, explaining the significance of this phase of the project and
discussing the Common Elements and Options.
Subsequent forums will occur approximately every two to three weeks and
will focus on particular topics – such as housing diversity, sustainable
economy – or geographical focuses, such as the industrial area or certain
commercial corridors.
The
public outreach for the Alternatives phase will end in April or May,
culminating in a city-wide workshop to discuss the alternatives, review public
input, and work towards the selection of a preferred plan. Separate hearings before the Planning
Commission and City Council will then be held to review the public input and
discuss recommendations for the preferred plan.
After the City Council has decided upon a preferred plan, policy
documents will be drafted, along with the new zoning ordinance, which will be
developed with its own public process.
To
inform the community of these opportunities, a city-wide mailing will be
distributed and information will be posted at community centers, public
libraries, City and project websites and cable television. Information will be
printed in the local papers and City Boards, Commissions, and Task Forces will
receive notice.
Prepared
by: Andy Agle, Interim
Director
Ellen Gelbard, Assistant Director
Amanda Schachter, Planning
Manager
Jonathan Lait, AICP, Principal
Planner
Betsy Wheeler Kollgaard,
Administrative Analyst
Planning and Community
Development Department