2014_04_10_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Thursday, April 10, 2014 Page 10 definitions. Mr. Paschke advised that this review was a direct result of issues that came 444 up during the Walmart Development project, as well as at the expiration of the AUAR 445 formerly addressing and regulating development or redevelopment in the Twin Lakes 446 Redevelopment Area. Mr. Paschke advised that part of this review included cross- 447 referencing other land use designations to assist in that guidance and as applicable uses 448 came forward; and upon the advice of the City Attorney (Attachment A), some reference 449 were eliminated and a mix of uses and connections were achieved in smaller area 450 development plans rather than depending on or referencing a broader Master Plan, 451 particularly as some of those were no longer relevant and had been predicated from the 452 old zoning code. 453 At the prompting of Member Boguszewski, Mr. Paschke clarified that the intent was to 454 avoid any perception of ambiguity or inconsistencies, and the legal opinion from the City 455 Attorney was requested by Mayor Roe to address any misconceptions that had come up 456 during the Walmart proposal. Mr. Paschke further clarified that the key was to focus on 457 cleaning up the land use definitions to eliminate any components that are or could be 458 problematic in the future; and from that standpoint, he was not overly concerned that the 459 current Statement of Purpose language was actually inconsistent, but in an effort to 460 ensure it wasn’t, consistent language was suggested. 461 At the request of Member Boguszewski, Mr. Paschke assured the Commission that the 462 City Attorney had been involved in the proposed language revisions and their 463 development throughout the process and was involved in the City Council discussions as 464 text revisions were continuing to evolve as the City Council sought to re-envision the 465 Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area. 466 Member Keynan pointed out several typographical errors and inconsistencies in the staff 467 report and agenda, and suggested they be corrected for future reference. 468 In his review of these proposed text revisions, Member Keynan questioned whether it 469 was more prudent to make these changes in a piecemeal fashion or to hold them all for a 470 broader and systematic review for revision all at one time. 471 Mr. Paschke advised that, as review continued or as issues came up, it seemed more 472 prudent to make changes at that time for those items that may have an impact versus 473 holding them to avoid any inconsistencies in development proposals continuing to come 474 forward during that time. 475 As part of the original Zoning Ordinance review committee, Chair Gisselquist noted the 476 intent to address every issue, with considerable time spent over a number of months 477 reviewing the Code in mind-numbing detail. While the committee felt everything had been 478 addressed, Chair Gisselquist observe that in reality and as circumstances come along, 479 questions were raised and inadvertent inconsistencies found. Chair Gisselquist opined 480 that he would advocate that as they came up or were found, they be addressed at that 481 time rather than waiting for a wholesale refinement process. 482 Mr. Paschke concurred, noting that often the issues were based on interpretation as well 483 as the complexities of an actual project were identified or potential uses considered and 484 the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code practically applied to that use or how either 485 document was impacted or be perceived to be impacted in the future. Mr. Paschke 486 opined that he found it to be more based on a particular instance as part of the review 487 process, and should be considered for resolution at that time; with the City Attorney and 488 City Council participating in those discussions and evaluations; and as clarification is 489 indicated. 490 Chair Gisselquist encouraged individual commissioners to bring forward any issues they 491 found in either document. 492 Chair Gisselquist closed Public Hearing at 8:07 p.m.; no one appeared for or against. 493 MOTION 494 Member Murphy moved, seconded by Member Cunningham to recommend to the 495