Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission Workshop <br /> October 12,2004 Page 2 <br /> 1. Discontinue reviewing concept proposals on large development tracts and see them only <br /> at the public hearing, or <br /> 2. Provide a more structured review of such concept plans and provide critical feedback for <br /> the applicant. <br /> An example of structure would be: <br /> A. Allow the Commission to "establish a vision" for the parcel in question prior to <br /> reviewing a concept plan; <br /> B. Prepare a "cheat sheet" of analytical questions and issues that the Commission can <br /> consider when reviewing a concept plan;and <br /> C. Discuss the plan openly and,if needed, bluntly with the applicant. <br /> Staff is looking for direction from the Commission in regards to how it feels the <br /> worksessions function. <br /> Information regarding findings of fact and motion making is attached for your reference. <br /> Please remember that you are making recommendations, not actually approving projects. <br /> Consider Revised River Park Concept <br /> Related Attachments: <br /> River Park Concept Plan, October 7, 2004 <br /> River Park Concept Plan, September 20, 2004 <br /> As the Planning Commission is aware, the City Council, at the request of Orrin Thompson— <br /> the applicant, has remanded the River Park development plan back to the Planning <br /> Commission for further consideration. Attached please find the most recent revision of the <br /> proposed development. The revised development contains 497 dwelling units <br /> Concept Plan 9/20 Concept Plan 10/7 <br /> Units <br /> Total Units 608 497 <br /> Single family 328 320 <br /> Townhouse 280 177 <br /> Public Space <br /> Total acres 26.7 27.2 <br /> Park/School/Fire 22.5 22.5 <br /> South park 4.2 4.7 <br /> Acres Preserved Woods 0.0 5.6 <br /> S:\PLANNING\Michele McPherson\PLREPRTS\10 12 04 PC workshop.doc <br />