2015-09-17_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Special Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, September 17, 2015 Page 3 With Senior Planner Lloyd pointing out two current HDR zones proposed for changes, Chair 101 Boguszewski clarified if they were changed to CMU-2, the height restriction would be built into the 102 new CMU-1 definition, but not the HDR-1, eliminating the 1,000 foot buffer problem. 103 Mr. Bilotta clarified that no higher than 2 stories would be allowed within or adjacent to any single- 104 family residential area down to Twin Lakes Parkway where it dead-ends, and then in a straight 105 line form WalMart from the Fireplace Store. Mr. Bilotta further clarified that everything north of 106 that would be less than 2 stories, or not exceeding 35’ all the way down to the Fireplace Store. 107 Chair Boguszewski opined that this would enable development south of Terrace Drive, and by 108 this zoning change, it achieved 2 stories north of County Road C and more intense height and 109 density south. 110 Mr. Bilotta concurred, noting the additional 100’ buffer around Langton Lake for further 111 protections. 112 While he observed the City Council spending significant time in their consideration of the various 113 subareas and their locations, Chair Boguszewski noted that they did not get into the specificities 114 of each use or their line by line development. 115 Mr. Bilotta concurred, noting that the City Council provided good and clear direction with each 116 subarea and their dividing characters and the intensity levels for each of the CMU subareas that 117 they’d discussed over several meetings, as well as line by line categories; their overall discussion 118 were broader, especially related to various retail uses. 119 Chair Boguszewski reviewed the process as staff belabored details and drafted the proposal for 120 the City Council’s intentional and thoughtful review, with their general direction given to staff, who 121 then drafted the details for Planning Commission review and subsequent recommendation to the 122 City Council. Therefore, if the Planning Commission recommended additional changes, Chair 123 Boguszewski suggested providing clarity on their rationale in those recommendations since 124 considerable work had already gone into this by the City Council and their direction to staff. 125 Mr. Bilotta concurred, noting that the City Council had put the broader pieces in place, and then 126 charged the Planning Commission with review of the more minute details and subcategories, 127 especially for retail uses, and their judgments and rationale in making their ultimate 128 recommendations. 129 Table 1005-5 – Table of Uses for CMU-1, 2, 3 and 4 and General Design Standards 130 Senior Planner Lloyd noted staff’s incorporation of proposed use changes in the table presented 131 at the September 2, 2015 regular Planning Commission meeting for each proposed district, 132 anticipating additional review and changes tonight with time devoted specifically to this and only 133 this issue at this special meeting of the Commission (Attachment C – RPCA dated September 2, 134 2015, pages 4 – 6). 135 Mr. Lloyd reviewed those initial changes made by the Commission and their general direction at 136 that time, including corporate headquarters and type of office or general office use. 137 Discussion ensued on how best to go through the table of uses and various zoning designation 138 subareas, with Chair Boguszewski determining, with consensus of the body that consideration 139 would be given to individual member input for uses only for those not having consensus. Further 140 discussion ensued in how best to highlight those areas to the City Council that were 141 recommended for change and whether or not they are in agreement with those proposed 142 changes or not. While recognizing that the public may wish to offer comment and participate in 143 each use category, Chair Boguszewski ruled that in an effort to keep things moving in a timely 144 fashion, public comment would be heard following the general discussion by the Commission, 145 with any additional changes considered as a result of that public feedback, and prior to voting on 146 the whole issue. 147 Office Uses 148 Corporate Headquarters 149 At the suggestion of Mr. Lloyd, and based on previous Commission discussions, it was the 150 consensus of the body to DELETE corporate headquarters as a Permitted (P) use. 151