CC - Agendas - City Council - REGULAR - 11/28/2017

Home

I 8.A.b I Prescott City Council Study Session Meeting — 10/31/2017 Page 3 more efforts on the planning side of Public Works and the development side of the Public Engineering department which would entail two separate codes for verification purposes. With regard to the location, the area is in a prime location for development. It is rather large with multiple roadways, the airport is in its immediate vicinity and was annexed into the city in 2013. Pro Tem Lamerson requested clarification that before the area was annexed four years ago, it had been contemplated around 2003 and 2004 in the General Plan and again in 2010. Mr. Worley concurred that the development was desired in 2003. The existing zoning for the Deep Well Ranch was presented. The current zoning on the property includes a mix of single family, multi-family, several different commercial designations and a large section which is industrial currently. d Deep Well Ranch and Current Zoning Density E 0 Mr. Worley presented on the Deep Well Ranch's current zoning density which includes To industrial light and development, business regional use, multi-family residential units 0 and single-family units and mixed used which is light commercial use. The commercial 0 areas provide opportunities which brings tax dollars. The designation has been N determined via mapping but no development has occurred. Pro Tern Lamerson inquired ;° what the contemplated population was in the last General Plan build out. Mr. Worley indicated it could vary due to unpredictability but the last numbers were estimated at 2 60,000 however, considerations need to factor in water and long term development. 0 Potential development densities could entail 15,069 dwelling units. Pro Tem Lamerson i stated that the water needs will depend on population. `0_ y y Master Plan Area Map un -0 Mayor Oberg requested that the master plan and the subsequent agreement be v, discussed as there are variations that need to be determined with regard to = development. Councilman Sischka shared that varying from the standards we have c` now, is not a bad thing. Mr. Worley said it is not bad, it is complex. Councilman Blair commented within the master plan, there are subsections to the master plan that are N always eligible to change. Prescott Lakes was used as an example in which the master M plan was changed numerous times. According to Mr. Worley, amendments to the w master plan are inevitable and have to go back to P & Z Commission and Council for 2 approval. People want to be assured of that the master plan is not set in stone and can o be changed. Mr. Worley agreed, some of the policies may be amended and modified. E' Councilwoman Wilcox inquired as to who would make decisions on the changes in the E master plan and if delegated administrators have autonomy to make changes without 0 public input or public hearing and had it been negotiated. The importance of a transparency was expressed. Mr. Worley acknowledged that modifications would entail decisions on a Council level and staff level of the master plan. Mayor Oberg asked what type of information is available to the public. Mr. Worley shared that access on the city's website is available to the public. Mr. Worley stated there are provisions that either party can propose modifications. Amendments occur quite a bit and is common. The property owners want certainty of standards and not constant change such as updating the city code, lock down the codes as they are today. I Packet Pg. 19 I