2010-07-07_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, July 07, 2010 Page 4 Tam McGehee 146 Ms. McGehee further questioned commercial/mixed use and what policies 147 governed residential housing as a part of mixed use zoning; and spoke in 148 opposition to residential zoning regulations not being carried over into mixed use 149 development containing multi-family housing. 150 Mr. Paschke advised that once a Mixed Use District was created, a regulating 151 plan and map, with applicable requirements, would have to be created. 152 Chair Doherty closed the Public Hearing at 6:07 p.m. 153 Discussion of Member Wozniak Written Comments 154 Mr. Paschke provided, as a bench handout, attached hereto and made a part 155 thereof, written comments from Member Wozniak specific to the Commercial 156 and Mixed Use Districts (Chapter 1004); and advised that staff would present 157 several additional revisions provided by the City Attorney in their review of the 158 proposed Zoning Code rewrite. Mr. Paschke reviewed and provided staff 159 responses for Member Wozniak’s and members and staff discussed the merits of 160 each to reach a consensus. 161 1004.02 Design Standards 162 Mr. Paschke advised that staff felt the proposed language was understandable 163 as written; and requested the Commission’s direction for modification, if any. Mr. 164 Paschke noted that this specific language related to existing building expansion 165 under 50%, and that any other application would be considered as new or a 166 major expansion. 167 Discussion included building floor area calculations for the footprint and number 168 of stories; and several examples of the realities of such a provision. 169 1004.02 Design Standards – Second Sentence 170 Discussion included how design standards would apply to multi-unit buildings or 171 complexes, with Mr. Paschke advising that it would be percentage based of the 172 total of each structure, not the site. 173 Paragraph E - Windows and Door Openings – Item 6 (page 2.e.6) 174 Discussion ensued regarding the intent of this language and definitions of 175 equipment versus office furniture; or whether a percentage should be used rather 176 than the 5’ length. 177 Suzanne Rhees, The Cunningham Group Consultants 178 Ms. Rhees clarified the intent of the proposed language, but concurred with 179 members that a percentage could also be utilized, rather than a specific footage. 180 Further discussion ensued regarding the distinction between equipment and 181 furniture based on the type of business that could be located in a Commercial 182 and/or Mixed Use District (e.g. restaurant, retail or office); enforcement issues; 183 and differences from display windows; fire code requirements; or whether to 184 stipulate that furniture could not be higher than the bottom window opening. 185 Ms. Rhees suggested that the 50% rule be applied, rather than a designated 5’ to 186 avoid equipment or other bulky items blocking window openings, with everything 187 else allowed. 188 Paragraph L – Trash Storage Areas 189 Mr. Paschke advised that staff did not concur that this item should be addressed 190 in this language, but that it would be in addressed in another place in City Code. 191 1004.03 – Table of Allowed Uses 192 Discussion included specific standards, with Mr. Paschke noting that some of 193 those standards remained, some remained from current code, some would be 194 revised, and some were entirely new. Mr. Paschke advised that those standards 195 for redevelopment would come before the Commission for review in the future; 196