2016-11-02_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular Planning Commission Meeting Draft Minutes – Wednesday, November 2, 2016 Page 7 MOTION 302 Member Murphy moved, seconded by Member Cunningham to recommend 303 to the City Council approval of amendment to Table 1006-1 and Section 304 1009-02, adding motor freight terminals as a CONDITIONAL USE in 305 Industrial Districts as detailed in the staff reports dated October 5, and 306 November 2, 2016; amended as follows: 307  Text Amendment (staff report, line 89): correct language to read 308 “and/or” versus “and.” 309 Commission Deliberation 310 Member Murphy stated he felt strongly about retaining the 10’ firefighting setback 311 for safety and maneuvering. Also, if the Commission attempted to insert “primary” 312 in the existing text, Member Murphy opined they would be walking down a 313 dangerous path without other areas of city code inspected and taken into 314 consideration. Regarding the trade-off for a Conditional User versus Variance 315 process, Member Murphy agreed there may be a trade-off, but opined that by 316 adopting the text as presented by staff, there were methods in place to 317 accomplish the goals of the business while not locking anyone else out. 318 Member Cunningham agreed with Member Murphy on the 10’ setback as outlined 319 by the Fire Marshal; and expressed appreciation for the applicant bringing up 320 consideration of the additional “primary” language, but agreed that there could be 321 repercussions or unintended consequences with including it. Under the 322 conditions for a Conditional Use, Member Cunningham noted she looked at her 323 job to set code standards that made sense in the majority of situations, and 324 opined that it seemed that the language being requested by the applicant served 325 their interests and made sense in their situation. Since she considered the 326 applicant’s situation to be more of an anomaly, Member Cunningham opined that 327 she found it more appropriate to deal with their situation through the Variance 328 process; and therefore, would support the motion as stated. 329 Member Kimble opined that one of the challenges with this text amendment and 330 the subsequent request by the applicant was that the Commission wasn’t 331 reviewing an actual site plan, but creating a global code in nature across the 332 board. Therefore, Member Kimble stated her support for the motion as presented. 333 Member Daire opined that one of the chief objectives seemed to be creating a 334 category for “motor freight terminals” into city code to distinguish between that and 335 trailer storage. Therefore, Member Daire opined that the points as laid out by staff 336 were reasonable. Member Daire thanked the applicant for bringing their site plan 337 forward as well as the stormwater pond information. Member Daire reviewed his 338 rationale in defining the principle street from which access is gained and its 339 address; along with the project site itself and two frontage roads along which 340 parking is not allowed. Member Daire agreed with his colleagues in a simple 341 solution would be a Variance process requesting parking be allowed along the 342 street from which access is gained, and opined it should not be difficult to achieve. 343 However, for the generality intended with these recommended text amendments, 344 Member Daire opined that he found it appropriate to contain the items before the 345 body; and that the specific request from this property be handled separately as a 346 Variance request to achieve their goals. While agreeing with the applicant’s 347 observations that the text couldn’t sufficiently apply to every site, using their 348 situation as an example, Member Daire noted that a Variance process would 349 easily address their particular circumstances; and therefore he would support this 350 motion as presented. 351 Member Gitzen spoke in support of the motion and in agreement the comments of 352 his other colleagues. 353