pm_070109 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, July 01, 2009 Page 2 Commissioner Boerigter concurred with Chair Doherty related to form-based code for specific vacant areas; however, opined that overall, form-based code dictating single-family neighborhoods seemed inapplicable, when there was little left to develop and not worthwhile to focus on that other than for a minimal number of primary areas available for development in the short-term, but not long-term. Commissioner Boerigter questioned the difference in using the current zoning, by use of setbacks and uses, from form-based zoning and creation of schematics; with both ultimately accomplishing similar results. Commissioner Boerigter opined that, whether using form-based codes or revisions to the current codes, there remained similar issues to be dealt with: uses; heights; sizes; proximity to roadways; parking locations and ratios, etc. Commissioner Boerigter noted the need to define fundamental designs based on goals and policies, many of which are aspirations in the Comprehensive Plan, and how they fit in specific areas. Commissioner Boerigter noted the difficulty in achieving consensus among Commissioners and/or Councilmembers in how the ideals work in practicality, as noted in General Land Use Goals and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan (e.g., Policy 8.1); and questioned whether the goals were too subjective and may actually mean different things to different people, creating different expectations throughout the details and process, while providing little guidance. Mr. Paschke advised that the consultant would be charged to work through various components in the existing code to come up with details and create a code around the goals and ideals of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Paschke noted some potential issues may be related to wind energy and changing technologies; a potential hybrid code using both Euclidian and form-based components; gradual processes; and staff’s attempts to educate the Commission on what was available without advocating for any particular code. Mr. Paschke opined that it was staff’s belief that the City’s current code was very short-sighted in addressing what minimum uses lie within a designated land use section of the City’s comprehensive plan; and that the existing document, even with revisions, will need major changes and overhaul of various sections to address the City’s guiding documents (i.e., the Comprehensive Plan and the Imagine Roseville 2025 community visioning process). Chair Doherty noted that the City wanted to have a document allowing more flexibility without use of Planned Unit Developments (PUD’s); but not so restrictive creating hundreds of rules for people to follow and reducing the rigidity of the current code. Commissioner Boerigter suggested that some of the ramifications of a form-based code might be that the City Council would have less to approve for individual development, since staff would be using the zoning administration tools rather than the PUD process, and less public awareness and input than the current system. Commissioner Boerigter noted that the comprehensive plan focused the bulk of changes in a few business-designated land use categories spread throughout the City; specifically noting the Twin Lakes area as an example, and advocating that the existing Twin Lakes Design Principles be used as a starting point and applied to code. Commissioner Boerigter opined that other areas needing focus in business land use categories were mostly at major intersections. Commissioner Boerigter opined that the residential land use designations may need minimal revision, but that they were probably not form-based and not hugely controversial or creating changes to neighborhood characteristics. Mr. Paschke reviewed the limited number of specific locations where newer zoning districts could be applied to achieve compliance with new land use designations, including office and institutional, with few if any substantial changes in residential land use designations, with the exception of minor tweaking. Mr. Paschke advised that the key was in determining whether certain areas should be afforded more flexibility, or if there were other areas where it would be in the City’s best interest to not allow for that flexibility; and potential changes in current perceptions. Mr. Paschke opined that the Twin Lakes Design Principles would need to be form-based, rather than strict Euclidian based code requiring PUD’s. Mr. Paschke noted the goal to create zoning districts throughout the community, allowing developers to demonstrate their intent to accommodate the City’s goals and policies. Mr. Paschke noted that, as an example, the City wouldn’t have a shoreland document that was form-based, but that a different kind of regulations would guide wetland setbacks and so on.