Laserfiche WebLink
Regular City Council Meeting <br /> Monday,March 11,2013 <br /> Page 9 <br /> While noting that there were existing businesses awaiting action on this text <br /> amendment to make business improvements, Mr. Trudgeon suggested that staff <br /> return with this item at a later date with possible options that would allow a great- <br /> er comfort level by the body. <br /> Councilmember Laliberte stated that she was comfortable moving with this today <br /> as recommended by staff and supported unanimously by the Planning Commis- <br /> sion. <br /> City Attorney Gaughan advised that, since the full body was not available tonight, <br /> this could create a problem for enactment of the Zoning Amendment, as it needed <br /> a super majority vote of the entire City Council; and with only three (3) members <br /> available for the vote, it would therefore require a 3/0 vote. <br /> Under those circumstances, Councilmember Laliberte suggested tabling action <br /> and returning the item to staff for revisiting by the full body. <br /> Laliberte moved, McGehee seconded, TABLING the proposed text amendment to <br /> Title 10 of the City Zoning Ordinance, to a date uncertain. <br /> Roll Call <br /> Ayes: Laliberte; McGehee; and Etten. <br /> Nays: None. <br /> b. Adopt a Zoning Text Amendment Creating a Definition for Limited Ware- <br /> housing and Distribution and Permitting as Permitted and Conditional Uses <br /> within the Regional Business and Office/Business Park Districts <br /> City Planner Thomas Paschke summarized the request for this text amendment, <br /> based on findings since adoption of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code <br /> updates, as detailed in the RCA dated March 11, 2013. Specific to this text <br /> amendment, Mr. Paschke noted that the request was for creation of a definition <br /> for "Limited Warehousing and Distribution" (lines 104-108 of the RCA) as a <br /> Permitted and/or Conditional Use in Regional Business and Office/Business Park <br /> Zoning Districts (Tables 1005-1 and 1006-1, lines 109-113 of the RCA). <br /> However, Mr. Paschke suggested that it may be a moot point, since the previous <br /> text amendment had been tabled. <br /> Discussion included clarification for allowance of vehicles versus trips; potential <br /> areas of impact as displayed on the map; and clarification by City Attorney <br /> Gaughan that the same super-majority vote would be required for this issue as <br /> well. <br />