Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission Meeting <br />Minutes – Wednesday, August 04, 2010 <br />Page 21 <br />subsequently creates a code that addresses those goals through designed <br />1007 <br />standards and allows mitigation or enhancement of various use impacts. <br />1008 <br />Chair Doherty closed the Public Hearing at approximately 9:05 p.m. <br />1009 <br />Discussion among Commissioners and staff included the need to identify the <br />1010 <br />sidebars on draft copies to indicate those sidebars that are for Commissioner <br />1011 <br />information and will be deleted on the final draft, and those that will remain for <br />1012 <br />public information purposes or to clarify or illustrate specific examples or issues; <br />1013 <br />and preference of Commissioners for redlined copies of revised drafts to avoid <br />1014 <br />their need to review and compare previous drafts. <br />1015 <br />Page 7, Parking Placement <br />1016 <br />Member Wozniak requested that standards for parking, incorporation of <br />1017 <br />landscaping and pedestrian access, be similar to those addressed previously in <br />1018 <br />the Regional Business District. <br />1019 <br />MOTION <br />1020 <br />Member Doherty moved, seconded by Member Wozniak to RECOMMEND <br />1021 <br />TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL of DRAFT Employment District <br />1022 <br />requirements as presented on August 4, 2010, establishing new regulations <br />1023 <br />under Title 10, Zoning Regulations, pertaining to the EMPLOYMENT <br />1024 <br />DISTRICTS, as detailed in the staff report dated August 4, 2010. <br />1025 <br />Ayes: 5 <br />1026 <br />Nays: 0 <br />1027 <br />Motion carried. <br />1028 <br />Amendment #1 <br /> <br />1029 <br />MOTION <br />1030 <br />Member Doherty moved, seconded by Member Gottfried, to RECOMMEND <br />1031 <br />TO THE CITY COUNCIL REVISED LANGUAGE to Section 1005, E, Control <br />1032 <br />Measures, Item 9, to read “Impact on contiguous property [properties <br />1033 <br />within the public notice distance as established by the City Council.]” <br />1034 <br />Ayes: 5 <br />1035 <br />Nays: 0 <br />1036 <br />Motion carried <br />1037 <br />Discussion included whether the word “contiguous” should be revised to <br />1038 <br />“surrounding properties,” with general consensus following that discussion that <br />1039 <br />the language for surrounding properties in the General Purposes section left no <br />1040 <br />confusion regarding what properties were affected and served the intended <br />1041 <br />purposes; and that the proscribed property notice area defined and previously <br />1042 <br />vetted by the City Council, and as periodically amended at their discretion, would <br />1043 <br />provide a consistent policy to follow rather than possible ambiguous <br />1044 <br />interpretation by staff on a case by case basis. <br />1045 <br />Amendment <br />1046 <br />MOTION <br />1047 <br />Member Doherty moved to RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL REVISED <br />1048 <br />LANGUAGE to Section 1005.05, B-2, Storage, Item 8, to include raw <br />1049 <br />materials. <br />1050 <br />Member Best, after further consideration, questioned if it was prudent to include <br />1051 <br />that language, asking how to define ‘raw materials,” and suggested that this may <br />1052 <br />be more detrimental and still not get at everything intended. <br />1053 <br />Discussion included current code provisions for outdoor storage; interpretation of <br />1054 <br />raw materials; recognizing that if it wasn’t on the list, it wasn’t allowed; <br />1055 <br />alternative indoor storage rather than outdoor storage. <br />1056 <br />Following discussion, Chair Doherty withdrew his motion. <br />1057 <br /> <br />