2014_1110_CCpacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

PHPCA UBLICEARING AND LANNINGOMMISSIONCTION 50 At the duly noticed public hearing of October 8, 2014, no citizens were present to address this 51 matter, but Commissioners did have a couple of questions of the Planning Staff. Specifically, 52 Commissioners desired clarification regarding the two code requirements and a better 53 understanding of parking lot lighting in general and whether a range was necessary. 54 The City Planner attempted to clarify the two Code requirements and provided the Planning 55 Commission with some brief background information regarding his review of other municipal 56 codes and his experience with the professionally created plans he has reviewed and approved in 57 the past (see Attachment A). 58 After discussion, the Planning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of a revised 59 amendment as stipulated below: 60 §1011.11.E.2.c. Open Parking Areas: 61 0.4 minimum foot-candle i. General parking and pedestrian areas: 0.9 foot-candle 62 General parkingVvehicle,and pedestrian0.4 to ii., use areas: 1 foot-candle 63 SCCA UGGESTEDITYOUNCILCTIONS 64 Adopt an Ordinance approving the Text Amendment to §1011.11.E.2.c. of the City Code, as 65 recommended by the Planning Commission, based on the comments and findings in the staff 66 analysis and the Planning Commission recommendation of October 8, 2014 (Attachment B). 67 AA LTERNATIVECTIONS 68 a.Pass a motion to approving revised Text Amendments to §1011.11.E.2.c and §1019.11.I 69 (Lighting). Since the Planning Commission hearing/meeting, the Planning Division staff has 70 reviewed the minutes and the existing Code sections to determine whether there is a better 71 approach that what we or the Planning Commission recommended. Based on that review it 72 appears that §1019.11.I is largely redundant and can be eliminated with minor changes to 73 §1019.11.I §1011.11.E.2.c.i. The option supported is to recommend elimination of and 74 §1011.11.E.2.c.iGeneral parkingVvehicle,and pedestrian reviseto read as:, use areas: 75 0.4 to 1 foot-candle. Such a change eliminates potential ambiguities between to two Code 76 sections in the future (Attachment C). 77 b.Pass a motion to table the item for future action. Tabling this item does not affect the 60- 78 day action deadline established in Minn. Stat. §15.99, since it does not apply to City initiated 79 items. The Planning staff, however, would seek specific direction of such an action. 80 c.Pass a motion, to deny the requested approvals. Denial should be supported by specific 81 findings of fact based on the City Council’s review of the application, applicable zoning 82 regulations, and the public record. 83 Prepared by: City Planner Thomas Paschke - 651-792-7074 | thomas.paschke@ci.roseville.mn.us Attachments: A: Draft PC Minutes Draft ordinance1 B: C: Draft ordinance2 PROJ-0017_Amdt21_RCA_111014 (2).doc Page 3 of 3