2010-10-06_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, October 06, 2010 Page 7 Member Gisselquist shared concerns expressed by Ms. Dushin in delineating 302 specific uses and questioned whether there was a more general way to describe 303 prohibited uses than by creating a list of specific uses. 304 Member Gottfried noted that the current process appeared to be patch worked 305 over the history of the existing zoning code; and that over the next ten (10) years, 306 it was obvious there would be amendments, additions and deletions, based on 307 uses not currently foreseen, and improvements to manufacturing processes with 308 new technologies; and supported the list as developed by staff. Member Gottfried 309 noted that it was easier for planning staff to interpret and enforce a list of 310 prohibited uses, rather than the subjective nature of criteria; and development of 311 performance measures for each zoning district in the new zoning code addressing 312 some concerns. 313 Chair Doherty concurred with Member Gottfried’s comments; noting that the list of 314 prohibited uses would be easier for the general public to understand and be more 315 user-friendly. 316 Mr. Paschke noted, from a staff perspective that the key to a code is that it be as 317 clear as possible, with few if any ambiguities or multiple interpretations, allowing 318 for a more transparent process and adhering to City, County and State standards 319 for their performance standards. Mr. Paschke advised that the new zoning code 320 would require applicants for a specific use to provide environmental and/or health 321 standards up front, along with supporting documentation, prior to issuance of a 322 building permit. Mr. Paschke clarified that the proposed performance standards 323 would not be to the magnitude required by State Statute or the MPCA , but would 324 provide an additional tool for the City to gain information about the performance 325 standards for a specific use. 326 Ms. Dushin reviewed the additional prohibited uses detailed in her written 327 comments and asked that reviewed and considered; and spoke in support of her 328 reference to an e-mail from Councilmember Dan Roe on the Roseville Issues 329 Forum website and his recommendation for developing a means that would allow 330 more stringent review of those uses with significant impacts on surrounding 331 neighborhoods. 332 At the request of Chair Doherty, Mr. Paschke advised that staff would review and 333 consider the additional prohibitions outlined in Ms. Dushin’s written comments, as 334 well as those discussed tonight by Commissioners, and noted that the City 335 Council may have additional revisions to the list. 336 Chair Doherty closed the Public Hearing at 7:34 p.m., with no one else appearing 337 for or against. 338 Chair Doherty spoke in support of the proposed list of prohibited uses. 339 At the request of Member Wozniak, Mr. Paschke reiterated that performance 340 standards were still being developed for the proposed zoning code, and would be 341 similar to currently existing for industrial uses, but attempting to remove 342 ambiguities. 343 Member Gisselquist expressed his concern in approving this type of “laundry list” 344 developed without due diligence and expressed his preference to waiting until 345 performance standards were discussed under general zoning discussions. 346 Member Gottfried recognized Member Gisselquist’s concerns with “laundry lists;” 347 however, opined that it did provide clarity, since performance standards may 348 create different interpretations, and if it was later determined that the list needed 349 to be more inclusive or less exclusive, there were mechanisms in place to make 350 that happen. Member Gottfried spoke in support of staff’s representation to the 351 City Council based on tonight’s discussion and public input; and from a 352 transparency point of view, supported the list as presented and its moving forward 353