2015-04-01_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, April 1, 2015 Page 2 Ayes: 7 46 Nays: 0 47 Motion carried. 48 4. Review of Minutes: January 7, 2015 Regular Meeting Minutes 49 MOTION 50 Member Cunningham moved, seconded by Member Murphy to approve the 51 January 7, 2015 meeting minutes as presented . 52 Ayes: 7 53 Nays: 0 54 Motion carried. 55 5. Communications and Recognitions: 56 a. From the Public (Public Comment on items not on the agenda) 57 None 58 b. From the Commission or Staff 59 Chair Boguszewski recognized the service of outgoing Planning Commissioners 60 Mohamed Keynan and Chair John Gisselquist. Chair Boguszewski thanked both Member 61 Keynan and Chair Gisselquist, highlighting the effective leadership provided by Member 62 Gisselquist during his tenure as Chair, especially during some often passionate land use 63 issues, and expressed his hope that he could continue that tradition. 64 Fellow Commission Members also expressed their appreciation. 65 6. Discussion Items 66 PROJECT FILE 0001 a. 67 Planning Division staff has been working on drafting an updated Subdivision 68 Code, and the Planning Commission has reviewed and discussed portions of the 69 update at various meetings in 2014. This discussion will help to introduce the 70 Subdivision Code to the new members and seek Commission feedback on 71 refinements to the “types” of subdivision applications, the procedures for 72 reviewing them, and the framework of subdivision standards. 73 Senior Planner Bryan Lloyd provided a bench handout, summarizing the four types of 74 subdivisions envisioned with the revised Subdivision Ordinance, attached hereto and 75 made a part hereof. Mr. Lloyd reviewed the background of the current ordinance and 76 rationale for staff’s recommendation for revisions as a result of practical applications and 77 issues coming forward with the current ordinance. Mr. Lloyd advised that the intent was 78 to address minor process issues as part of the application process and forms rather than 79 having to change the ordinance each time something was found that was not of a policy 80 or more involved text amendment. Mr. Lloyd noted that each of the four proposed 81 subdivisions as summarized would provide an established procedure and review process 82 for applications. 83 Mr. Lloyd advised that the previously suggested refinements of the Planning Commission 84 discussions had been incorporated into this bench handout, and sought further feedback 85 from the Commission as set up in the draft, as well as a more broad discussion of the 86 Subdivision Code process for each type. Mr. Lloyd clarified that there remained technical 87 gaps in the proposed Code that still needed work by staff and the City Attorney before 88 being finalized. 89 At the request of Chair Boguszewski, Mr. Lloyd provided examples or the most common 90 requests received from past cases of various types of subdivisions that would fall under 91 each category proposed. 92 Discussion included specific processes and timing for public hearings at the Planning 93 Commission and/or City Council level; public notification concerns previously addressed 94 and incorporated into this new version; intent for low-impact applications to be heard 95