Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission Meeting <br />Minutes – Wednesday, July 07, 2010 <br />Page 9 <br />Chair Doherty again closed public comment at this time. <br />400 <br />At the request of Chair Doherty, Mr. Paschke addressed the groundwater plan at <br />401 <br />the library site, noting that any commercial development needed to present a <br />402 <br />storm water management plan for approval by the City as well as their specific <br />403 <br />Watershed District, meeting all requirements and containment and/or filtration. <br />404 <br />Discussion among Commissioners and staff included rationale for not including <br />405 <br />development and/or maintenance of natural environments across all districts <br />406 <br />whether commercial or residential, with Mr. Paschke noting that there were few <br />407 <br />commercial/industrial zones left to develop; however, noting that they could be <br />408 <br />advocated for, with the overall zoning ordinance promoting green areas, <br />409 <br />landscaping and pedestrian-friendly connections, while balancing what is existing <br />410 <br />and what is being created. Mr. Paschke further noted that the requirements <br />411 <br />would be found within landscape requirements of the ordinance, not in this <br />412 <br />specific document. <br />413 <br />Mr. Paschke noted that the City Attorney’s office had provided comment on Page <br />414 <br />7 requesting the inclusion of setback requirements on the table under <br />415 <br />Dimensional Standards; that the word “Maximum” needed to be added in <br />416 <br />addressing the percentages; and other items were similar to and addressed in <br />417 <br />Member Wozniak’s written comments. <br />418 <br />MOTION <br />419 <br />Member Doherty moved, seconded by Member Wozniak to RECOMMEND <br />420 <br />APPROVAL of draft Commercial and Mixed Use District requirements, <br />421 <br />establishing new regulations under Title 10, Zoning Regulations, pertaining <br />422 <br />to the COMMERCIAL AND MIXED USE DISTRCITS, as presented and <br />423 <br />detailed in the Request for Planning Commission Action dated July 7, 2010; <br />424 <br />with staff directed to incorporate modifications from tonight’s discussion, <br />425 <br />including: <br />426 <br />Modifications to be incorporated by staff from tonight’s discussion: <br />427 <br /> Paragraph L – Trash Storage Areas <br />428 <br />o <br /> Windows and Door Openings – page 2.e.6, paragraph 3, incorporate the <br />429 <br />o <br />50% rule, with equipment or other bulky items blocking window or door <br />430 <br />openings, must be 5’, everything else is allowed; <br />431 <br /> Front setback requirements to address right-of-way easements in the text <br />432 <br />o <br />and chart, with a revised statement, pending further discussion with the City <br />433 <br />Attorney <br />434 <br /> Include surface parking requirements for CB similar to that under RB (page <br />435 <br />o <br />10, Section f) <br />436 <br /> Add that “structured parking” is treated as a building type and designated as <br />437 <br />o <br />such for Community Mixed Use proposals <br />438 <br /> In the Statement of Purpose Page 1, item e), add language to encourage <br />439 <br />o <br />enhancement of the natural environment [as feasible.] <br />440 <br />Staff advised that they would address those typographical and numbering errors <br />441 <br />as indicated before going forward to the City Council. <br />442 <br />Ayes: 6 <br />443 <br />Nays: 1 (Boerigter) <br />444 <br />Motion carried. <br />445 <br />Member Boerigter advised that he wasn’t convinced that the proposed design <br />446 <br />standards were appropriate and fitting; yet indicating that he had no great <br />447 <br />negative concerns as indicated by some speakers during public comment <br />448 <br /> <br />