2010-11-03_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, November 03, 2010 Page 7 Further discussion included Section 1019.05(A) and modification requests 309 determined by the Zoning Administrator to allow flexibility in minimum/maximum 310 requirements depending and expertise of the author of the designs and planning 311 process to avoid an applicant having to hire another consultant if it was deemed 312 reasonably addressed by another engineer or existing qualified consultant, with 313 the final decision made by the Zoning Administrator, not the applicant. 314 Additional discussion included application of common and consistent design 315 standards, similar to recycling and trash containers, in the performance section of 316 the code, rather than applying them to each separate zoning code as in the 317 current code; with staff noting those standards specific to uses in a specific 318 district, and those better suited to locating them in the different districts rather 319 than buried in the performance standards section to provide a more user-friendly 320 interpretation by readers and implementers of the code. Staff noted that the goal 321 was to make the document as free-flying as possible, with specific standards 322 applied in Use Charts as applicable. 323 Member Wozniak noted some design standard elements had been incorporated 324 in this section, specifically related to pedestrian movement; and sought 325 assurances that staff would compare this section with those other sections to 326 provide consistency; and including references to each section. 327 Member Cook concurred, noting past discussions to transfer “islands” to this 328 section. 329 Member Gottfried further suggested the logic for the commercial section and the 330 formula for parking spaces and parking lot sizes to also be addressed similarly. 331 Ms. Radel advised that staff would review those areas further for consistency, 332 and where performance standards could be consolidated and where separated. 333 Mr. Paschke noted that the design standards referenced in each zoning district 334 were built into each district; at which point property performance standards for all 335 uses needed to achieve universal standards not specific to a zone or use within a 336 zone, and not separated out, but placed in one larger section. Mr. Paschke 337 questioned whether parking calculations were appropriate in zoning district 338 chapters, or how many would be placed in property performance standards 339 based on their specificity. 340 Public Comment 341 Chair Doherty closed the Public Hearing at 7:22 p.m., with no one appearing for 342 or against. 343 MOTION 344 Member Gottfried moved, seconded by Member Doherty to RECOMMEND 345 TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL of DRAFT PARKING AND LOADING 346 AREA requirements as presented in Attachment A to the staff report dated 347 November 3, 2010, establishing new regulations under Title 10, Zoning 348 Regulations, pertaining to parking and loading areas; with staff duly noting 349 those items addressed during tonight’s meeting requiring further follow-up. 350 Ayes: 6 351 Nays: 0 352 Motion carried. 353 Chair Doherty turned the gavel over to Member Wozniak to serve as Acting Chair at about 7:24 354 p.m. 355 PROJECT FILE 0017 c. 356 Request by the Roseville Planning Division to adopt new regulations for 357 Title 10, Zoning Regulations of the City Code pertaining to Property 358 Performance Standards (to be continued to the November 17, 2010 359