2015-09-17_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Special Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, September 17, 2015 Page 9 Outdoor Display 390 At the request of Chair Boguszewski, Mr. Lloyd advised that the term referred to mulch outside 391 hardware stores as an example versus flashing signs. 392 Outdoor Storage, Inoperable Vehicles/Equipment 393 At the request of Member Cunningham, Mr. Lloyd advised that the term referred to something like 394 a repair shop; but since there wasn’t one as a P use, it should probably be made NP across the 395 board, which was agreed to by consensus of the body for CMU-1, 2 ,3 and 4 designated areas. 396 With Members Bull and Cunningham questioning if a trailer stored on a lot, since inoperable, fell 397 into that category, Member Murphy clarified that they were actually operable by hooking them up 398 to a vehicle, similar to those on Fairview Avenue, with no flat tires and all licensed, thereby 399 making them essentially all operable. 400 Parking 401 At the request of Member Cunningham, Mr. Bilotta defined it as the principle use (e.g. parking 402 structure or surface lot by payment); with Member Bull noting and Mr. Bilotta confirming that in 403 CMU-1, they would have to restrict access between 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. Mr. Bilotta noted that 404 the intent is to differentiate between surface and structured parking by trying to minimize large 405 surface lots in all CMU Districts. 406 Restaurants (Fast Food) and Restaurants (Fast Food with Drive-through) 407 Chair Boguszewski suggested fast food uses be NP in CMU-1 due to additional traffic generated. 408 Member Bull suggested CU all the way across all CMU designations, or at a minimum NP in 409 CMU-1, then CU in CMU-2, 3 and 4 designated areas. 410 Mr. Paschke didn’t disagree with the logic, but noted an example of a strip mall having a Subway 411 franchise; and clarified that the key is that drive-through vehicle traffic is dramatically different 412 between these two uses, with a definite distinction provided in City Code not by type by 413 generically. 414 As an example, Mr. Bilotta noted that the recently opened “Grateful Table Bakery” would fall 415 within the fast food definition. 416 Member Murphy noted the proposed restaurant use south of the new hotels by the Metro transit 417 Park & Ride ramp, and while not sure if it is intended as a fast food use, opined that it didn’t seem 418 to be close to residential areas or intended to generate large traffic or noise issues. 419 Mr. Paschke clarified that, if a restaurant was not a full service, sit down use, theoretically it fell 420 into the fast food category, such as Davanni’s use suggested as an example by Chair 421 Boguszewski, falling into that full service, sit down category. 422 Given that distinction, Chair Boguszewski suggested balancing that use with NP for CMU-1, 2 423 and 3, with CMU-4 P use. 424 At the request of Member Murphy as to his rationale, Chair Boguszewski noted it added an 425 additional buffer. 426 Member Murphy noted the buffer area around Langton Lake for pedestrian access. 427 Member Cunningham offered her support of Chair Boguszewski’s suggestion. 428 Member Bull noted that drive-through uses could essentially be walk-through uses as well. 429 By consensus, the uses were designated as NP for CMU-1, CU for CMU-2, P for CMU-3 and 430 P for CMU-4 designated areas. 431 At the request of Member Murphy as to rationale in defining restaurants by fast food or drive 432 through, Mr. Paschke noted that the City had not supported drive-through restaurant uses in the 433 Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area for at least fifteen years; and while it may remain in theory on 434 the books, the intent was to limit the volume of additional vehicles for restaurants with a drive- 435 through. Mr. Paschke noted that the CMU does permit fast food, so designating the use as a CU 436 was fine. 437