Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Ayes: 3. Duncan, Bakeman, Peper <br />Nays: 2, Stone, Traynor <br />Motion carried. <br /> <br />Member Bakeman asked for clarification of the fence ownership. Member Traynor questioned the impact. <br /> <br />c. Planning File 3192: Lot Coverage: Definitions and Report; Next steps in clarification process. <br /> <br />Dennis Welsch explained that in 1994, when the Commission and Council adopted the City's Comprehensive Plan, <br />a key element of the land use policy was to eliminate retail and business encroachment into residential areas; <br />growth for these business sectors would have to occur by intensification on existing sites, by redevelopment, and <br />by conversions of Brownfield industrial areas. <br /> <br />In 2000, the City Council reviewed shopping center building expansions. A major issue was lot coverage at the <br />Roseville and Har-Mar Shopping Centers and other "SC" districts. The Council provided clarification and direction <br />for interpretation of the Code on January 24, 2000, suggesting that the broader issue of lot coverage in shopping <br />center districts should be discussed at a future date. Three terms (lot area, building area, floor area ratio) are <br />critical to the understanding of the existence, continuance and expansion of these centers. What follows is a <br />discussion of some of the issues related to these terms and suggested remedies. <br /> <br />Mr. Welsch discussed the discrepancies and interpretative problems with the existing Code. Given the new <br />ordinances (2000) and the Council's definition for lot area, it has been difficult to find a universal interpretation of <br />percent building coverage and floor area ratio (FAR) unless certain exceptions or interpretations are made. <br /> <br />Motion: Member Traynor moved, seconded by Member Peper, to recommend that Sections 5.1 through 5.6 <br />be sent to the Council for further study and discussion, after which the Council may request the Planning <br />Commission to hold hearings on specific topics or clarifications of Code language. <br /> <br />Ayes: 5 <br />Nays: 0 <br />Motion carried. <br /> <br />Member Bakeman asked for clarification of the fence ownership. Member Traynor questioned the impact. <br /> <br />d. Set next Work Session and Zoning Study Meetings <br /> <br />October 17 or October 18 scheduled for next work session. <br /> <br />8. Adjourn: 9:00 p.m. <br /> <br />Return to Planning Commission <br />