CC_Minutes_2010_1213 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, December 13, 2010 Page 17 In recent discussions at the Planning Commission level, Mr. Stark noted recom- mendation for referencing the Parks and Recreation Master Plan as a guiding doc- ument, while at the same time placing new restrictions on facilities through the design standards in the zoning code rewrite; with proposed revisions for the Con- ditional use process that would be required for park and recreation improvements may be contrary to the Parks Master Plan. Mr. Stark noted the most recent exam- ple of the Conditional Use application for a communications tower in one of the City's parks that provided for an incompatible use with long -range plans for parks. Mr. Stark noted that staff and City Council's change over time, and that it was the Commission's concern that the processes and mechanisms in place were preserved allowing park changes and improvements based on the vision of the community through the Master Plan process. Mr. Stark expressed further Commission concerns that language was unclear re- lated to the exemption of trails and pathway setbacks; application for proposed screening of dumpsters and portable facilities due to their seasonal nature and whether those temporary or portable facilities would be protected under the grandfather provision or required to go through a Conditional Use process since they were basically recreated annually or seasonally. Mr. Stark suggested that the Master Plan should be the document describing de- sign standards for parks; and if not included as part of the ordinance, the zoning code should provide a statement that any design standards for parks should be subject to review by the Parks and Recreation Commission. Mr. Stark advised that the Commission was advocating for relaxed design standards to provide the necessary flexibility for parks and their neighbors; and that the spirit of the ordin- ance be consistent with others, but allow that flexibility to recognize the individu- al nature of parks and future park applications. Discussion among Councilmembers staff and Mr. Stark included clarifying langue in Section 1008.03 DESIGN STANDARDS, Subsection D and J and various in- terpretations; staff's confirmation that Section I had been revised since the pre- vious draft to further clarify concerns for trash storage areas and revised language removing type of materials for screening enclosures. Mr. Trudgeon clarified that portable facilities (e.g. dumpsters and portable re- stroom facilities) were permitted uses, with revised language reducing financial impacts. Mr. Trudgeon noted that the discussion regarding nonconformities was relevant, using the dumpster behind the ice arena as an example of a use not cur- rently screened, which would not change, as a grandfathered use and seeming to be permanent. However, for those used in parks and only during the summer, whether a dumpster or portable restroom facility, it would fall into the "seasonal" category, and under PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, would lose their noncon- forming status if use was discontinued for a year. Mr. Trudgeon noted that if the