Laserfiche WebLink
<br />67 <br /> <br />2040 ISSUES AND POLICIES – ONGOING IMPLEMENTATION <br />STEPS AND FURTHER RESEARCH <br />Introduction <br />The City’s Planning Commission and City Council, along with staff and interested members of <br />the public held workshop meetings relating to specific issues areas, and how the City may approach <br />each issue in the context of long-term planning and decision-making. The discussions included <br />the following ideas and options (some which may be complementary, some which may be in <br />conflict with each other). As an ongoing implementation step, either in annual goal setting or for <br />independent study, the City will use this discussion summary to develop more specific goals, <br />policies, and plans that encompass these elements. <br />Future of Mobile Home Parks <br />1. Maintain current status as private development matter; <br /> <br />2. Balance residents’ rights with owners’ rights in any City action; <br /> <br />3. Consider providing incentives, or stronger, for compliance with contemporary zoning <br />requirements, or enhancements to the residential environments; Or as an option, consider <br />rezoning the property to Mobile Home Park, just to reinforce the current land use; <br /> <br />4. Consider facilitating redevelopment to other multiple family housing options – presumably <br />including at least a commensurate supply of affordable housing as a part of the redevelopment <br />project. <br /> <br />5. Distinguish between the three mobile home parks, due to unique locations/conditions/etc., <br />especially noting that North Star is in an industrial area, whereas the others are along Rice <br />Street; <br /> <br />6. Note that Rice Street is a largely commercial frontage, and consider land use compatibility <br />with any redevelopment concepts; <br /> <br />7. Keep in the mind the access and proximity to transit options for mobile home park residents <br />(or replacement affordable housing options); <br /> <br />8. In this context – consider reexamination of the City’s long-standing approach to “affordable” <br />and other multi-family housing, which has been to resist additional housing stock in these <br />categories – reflecting the large current supply – with the exception of senior housing options. <br />Continue City’s policy of facilitating improvements and livability to existing affordable <br />housing properties. Is this issue separate from higher density upscale development? Also, how <br />does this issue split between redevelopment and greenfield development? <br /> <br />