CC_Minutes_2017_0724 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,July 24,2017 Page 17 As a Planning Commission, Mr. Murphy stated that he was here to speak in oppo- sition to an amendment to the PUD, opining it was not the best use of the property in a Business Park. If any amendment is to be made, Mr. Murphy opined that it needed to be made after a broader study of the best possible use of that area today. Mayor Roe summarized that the proposed use doesn't fit with the existing PUD permitted uses for this property; nor did it match uses for current Office/Business Park designation that may or may not apply to this site. Willmus moved, Etten seconded, DENIAL of this request based on the following findings by the maker of the motion, advice of the City Attorney, and input by Mayor Roe: ■ As detailed in the B-4 Table of Permitted Uses within each Building Type, (RCA,page 3), the storage use as proposed is not identified as a permitted use under the existing PUD ■ In the 2010 city code update and design standards regulating development, additional uses under Office/Business Park Districts, Table 1006-1 do not specifically allow the "storage"use as proposed as a permitted use; ■ Based on staffs analyses, applicant introduction, and public testimony heard tonight, it suggests that retail use is inconsistent with the original in- tent of the PUD. ■ One of the underlying purposes of the Office/Business Park is as an Em- ployment District and the provision of high paying and a fair quantity of jobs, and the proposed storage use as retail does not specifically relate to that job creation and the city's preference for primary versus support uses. Roll Call Ayes: Willmus, Etten and Roe. Nays: None. Motion carried. Mayor Roe indicated that the council directed staff and City Attorney Gaughan to provide written notice of findings for denial to the applicant in a timely manner; and directed staff to include consideration for a future process for this site on a fu- ture City Council agenda. g. Consider Amendment to City Council Rules of Procedure As previously noted, this item was removed from tonight's agenda pending fur- ther consideration. g. Consider Inclusivity and Welcoming Statement as proposed by Coun- cilmember Etten (Addition to Tonight's Agenda by Councilmember Etten) Based on recent community discussions and evidence of residents experiencing discrimination in various ways, Councilmember Etten submitted his proposal for City Council consideration to confirm the city's position as a welcoming and in-