PC Minutes 11/15/06 DRAFT
ITEM NO. 12: REVISIONS TO CHAPTER 20, DEVELOPMENT CODE (JCR)
TA-10-12-06: Consider amendments to Chapter 20, Development Code to define a new use [private dining facilities] that could be permitted through a Special Use Permit process in residential districts. Initiated by the City Commission on October 17, 2006.
STAFF PRESENTATION
Joe Rexwinkle, Planning Staff, gave a brief overview and introduction to the text amendment. Mr. Rexwinkle stated this text amendment was initiated by the City Commission and is to permit private dining in certain residential districts with standards applying. This text amendment will amend Articles 4, 5 and 17. Mr. Rexwinkle explained the minimum standards and that the amendment to Article 5 will allow for additional use as a new, very specific, subsection. The amendment to Article 17 will add the use “Private Dining Establishment” as a defined term.
Comm. Krebs stated that Horizon 2020 does not define neighborhoods and asked what criteria neighborhoods have to meet. She also asked for a definition of mixed use.
Mr. Rexwinkle indicated there was an attempt to define mixed use on a neighborhood scale in subsection 3 of 20-539 General Standards for Private Dining Establishments.
Ms. Stogsdill referenced the Code definition of mixed use.
Comm. Krebs stated that lots are mixed use if there are multiple uses on one lot. She questioned whether the term “mixed use” referred to an area where there is one lot that is a certain use and another that is a different use.
Comm. Haase asked the timeline for the Krause’s to resume business should all approvals be granted.
Ms. Stogsdill said the text amendment will go to City Commission on December 5th. If approved, the ordinance will be drafted for first and second reading and can be published by the end of the week of the second reading. The ordinance can potentially be drafted per Planning Commission recommendation and the Special Use Permit (SUP) could be submitted for consideration in at the December Planning Commission meeting. The SUP would not go forward if the text amendment did not go forward. Ms. Stogsdill stated the ordinance could be adopted by the December meeting, followed by the SUP being heard by the City Commission. The best case scenario would be a mid-January implementation and there would need to be compliance with any conditions of approval before the SUP is fully implemented.
Comm. Eichhorn questioned whether bed and breakfast establishments would continue to be single family use in RS districts.
Ms. Stogsdill replied that bed and breakfasts are allowed in single family districts under the new code.
Comm. Harris asked why this use would not be allowed in RS3 and RM districts.
Mr. Rexwinkle stated the lots would be too small and neighborhoods too dense.
Ms. Day stated the City Commission discussion was pertaining to single family use. Staff discussed adding it to multi-family districts and whether that would be an appropriate activity. The City Commission initiated this action to RS zoning.
PUBLIC HEARING
Robert Krause, applicant, spoke to the issue of limiting hours of use. He said he would prefer not to rush customers which would be a hardship on the type of service he would like to provide. He suggested if the hours were limited, to make them reasonable and provided an example of 10:30 p.m. - 11:00 p.m. weekdays and 11:30 p.m. - 12:00 a.m. on weekends. Mr. Krause stated the other pertinent issue is serving outside. He said he does not wish to serve meals outside but would like to have the ability to greet guests and offer beverages and hors d’oeuvres outdoors. Mr. Krause said he would like to follow the letter of the law but serving no food or beverages outside would be a hardship. Mr. Krause also expressed gratitude for the time that has been spent in consideration of this request.
Comm. Burress asked what hours would be acceptable to Mr. Krause.
Mr. Krause replied that he would begin service around 6:30 p.m. on weeknights and allow approximately 3 hours for dinner. The service does not always last that long; larger groups would take more time. He stated the dinners are sedate and there is not a lot of noise.
Comm. Harkins said the language does not stipulate hours. He commented that the language does indicate that all dispensing and consumption of beverages and food shall occur indoors. Comm. Harkins suggested changing the language to stating “service of prepared meals shall occur indoors.”
STAFF CLOSING COMMENTS
Ms. Day stated the hours of operation are not part of the text amendment being considered at this meeting and the hours would be reviewed with each individual application. In regards to consumption of food and beverages outdoors, the language choice is deliberate. Ms. Day said that it should not be allowed to occur outside or if it occurs, there should be very dense material installed along property lines to absorb the sounds associated with the service.
Comm. Krebs stated the Planning Commission has discretion regarding screening.
Comm. Harkins pointed out that the neighboring house the Krause’s purchased is a buffer and that service of drinks on the patio seems like a reasonable request.
Comm. Erickson commented that the text amendment language is more general to apply to more than just this specific applicant and questioned whether this can be accomplished through an SUP.
Ms. Day stated the text amendment has been structured to allow that flexibility.
Ms. Stogsdill clarified that any SUP submitted for approval will be required to adhere to the same standards and may have additional conditions imposed.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION
Comm. Harris suggested restating the language to read that “the Planning Commission shall have the discretion to determine if all dispensation of food or beverages shall occur indoors.”
Comm. Haase said he found it troublesome to identify the Planning Commission as able to make recommendations for these restrictions. He suggested the Planning Commission be silent on that issue and add recommendations as forwarded to the Commission for consideration.
Comm. Krebs stated Comm. Harris’ proposed text change could provide that language. She asked if staff could modify the text to reword mixed use lots and outlined changes as:
· 3 (ii) a from: The use shall be contained in neighborhoods with a predominace of Mixed Use lots, tracts, parcels, or buildings or structures as the term mixed use is defined in Section 20-1701. Neighborhoods which are predominantly single-dwelling residential in nature shall not be considered for private dining uses to “use shall be contained within or adjacent to blocks with non-residential uses in a neighborhood with mixed uses or zoning districts.”
· 3 (iii) a from: The Planning Commission shall have discretion to require landscaping and screening as deemed necessary given the operational, neighborhood and site characteristics for the use as a condition of Special Use Permit approval to “The Planning Commission shall have discretion to require landscaping and screening as deemed necessary given the operational, neighborhood and site characteristics for the use as a condition of Special Use Permit approval.”
ACTION TAKEN
Moved by Comm. Haase, seconded by Comm. Eichhorn, to forward a recommendation for approval of the proposed revisions [TA-10-12-06] to Articles 4, 5, and 17 “Development Code, July 1, 2006 Edition,” to the City Commission with instructions given to Staff regarding changes to the verbiage in sections 1 (v), 1 (ix) and 3 (iii) a.
(2) Off-street Parking
Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with the applicable provisions of Article 9 of Chapter 20 of the Land Development Code for the primary use as a residence.
The Planning Commission and City Commission shall have the discretion to adjust the amount of parking required and/or the permitted location and site design of off-street parking facilities dedicated to Private Dining uses as a condition of Special Use Permit approval.
Off-street parking shall be provided in such a way as to maintain the residential pattern and character of the neighborhood in which the use is proposed to occur.
A Private Dining use shall be accessory to an owner-occupied principal residential use.
a. The use shall be
contained in neighborhoods with a predominace of that include Mixed
Use lots, tracts, parcels, or buildings or structures as the term mixed use is
defined in Section 20-1701. Neighborhoods which are predominantly single-dwelling
residential in nature shall not be considered for private dining uses. The
use shall be contained within or adjacent to blocks with nonresidential uses in
a neighborhood with mixed uses or zoning districts.
b. The Use shall have direct access to a pubic street or right-of-way. Use shall not be allowed on private streets.
The use shall be compatible with and maintain the character of the neighborhood.
a. The Planning Commission shall have discretion to require landscaping and screening as deemed necessary given the operational, neighborhood and site characteristics for the use as a condition of Special Use Permit approval.
a. The exterior of the residence shall remain consistent with the primary function as a dwelling unit.
b. No exterior signage or advertising material permitted in residential districts.
a. The Planning Commission and City Commission shall have the discretion to determine if serving and consumption of any food and/or beverage may occur outdoors.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION
Comm. Harris suggested alternate wording for 3 (ii)a: “use shall be contained within or adjacent to blocks with non-residential uses in a neighborhood with mixed uses or zoning districts.”
Comm. Harkins recommended that legal staff review the language prior to forwarding the changes to the City Commission.
Comm. Harris concurred.
ACTION TAKEN
Motion on the floor was to forward a recommendation for approval of the proposed revisions [TA-10-12-06] to Articles 4, 5, and 17 “Development Code, July 1, 2006 Edition,” to the City Commission with instructions given to Staff regarding changes to the verbiage in sections 1 (v), 1 (ix) and 3 (iii) a and as shown below:
(1) The operation of a Private Dining Establishment in certain RS, RSO and RMO Districts shall be limited to
(2) Off-street Parking
Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with the applicable provisions of Article 9 of Chapter 20 of the Land Development Code for the primary use as a residence.
The Planning Commission and City Commission shall have the discretion to adjust the amount of parking required and/or the permitted location and site design of off-street parking facilities dedicated to Private Dining uses as a condition of Special Use Permit approval.
Off-street parking shall be provided in such a way as to maintain the residential pattern and character of the neighborhood in which the use is proposed to occur.
(3) Site-Related Standards
A Private Dining use shall be accessory to an owner-occupied principal residential use.
a. The use shall be
contained in neighborhoods with a predominace of that include Mixed
Use lots, tracts, parcels, or buildings or structures as the term mixed use is
defined in Section 20-1701. Neighborhoods which are predominantly
single-dwelling residential in nature shall not be considered for private
dining uses. The use shall be contained within or adjacent to blocks
with nonresidential uses in a neighborhood with mixed uses or zoning districts.
b. The Use shall have direct access to a pubic street or right-of-way. Use shall not be allowed on private streets.
The use shall be compatible with and maintain the character of the neighborhood.
a. The Planning Commission shall have discretion to require landscaping and screening as deemed necessary given the operational, neighborhood and site characteristics for the use as a condition of Special Use Permit approval.
a. The exterior of the residence shall remain consistent with the primary function as a dwelling unit.
b. No exterior signage or advertising material permitted in residential districts.
a. The Planning Commission and City Commission shall have the discretion to determine if serving and consumption of any food and/or beverage may occur outdoors.
Motion passed 9-0-1 with Comm. Finkeldei abstaining.