PC Minutes 12/18/06

ITEM NO. 10:           AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 20, DEVELOPMENT CODE (JCR)

 

TA-10-11-06:  Consider amendments to Chapter 20, Development Code to correct inconsistencies since adopted. (Initiated by the Planning Commission at their November meeting.)

 

STAFF PRESENTATION

Mr. Joseph Rexwinkle introduced the item and summarized the recommendation.

Staff recommended the Planning Commission forward a recommendation for approval of the proposed revisions [TA-10-11-06] to Articles 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 13 and 17 of the “Development Code, July 1, 2006 Edition,” to the City Commission.

 

Commissioner Harkins wanted to know if the TA recommendations had all been signed off on by the city attorneys.

 

Mr. John Miller said that they have reviewed it but they can provide additional scrutiny if needed.

 

Commissioner Harkins said he would feel more comfortable with an attorney reviewing them first.

 

Commissioner Erickson stated that on page 10, Standard (3) it says outdoor dining use and she wanted to know why two districts (CD and CN1) were specifically called out instead of saying just outdoor dining?

 

Mr. Rexwinkle said that it was possible commercial uses, in that district could be located in close proximity to a residence. In more intense commercial zoning districts there would not be that issue.

 

Commissioner Krebs stated that the clause following this list of districts is about the increase in parking which should just define the other outdoor dining uses.

 

Mr. Rexwinkle said that they were trying to be consistent.

 

Commissioner Krebs requested to add a comma after “districts.”

 

Commissioner Erickson requested a change be made on page 6 footnote (9) “elsewhere” should not be capitalized. On page 11 (2) the sentence ends with “or.” Also on page 14 where the strikeout of “construction of” is at it should include “buildings.”

 

Commissioner Haase inquired about guidance for determining Commercial Design Standards.

 

Mr. Rexwinkle stated that if it is just a change in use to a less intensive then it would not require more then a minor site plan review.

 

Commissioner Haase asked if when this type of situation comes up, would there have to be compliance with Commercial Design Standards?

 

Mr. Rexwinkle said he thought there was a Text Amendment that was passed recently striking color from the list of changes that would require site planning.

 

Commissioner Haase stated that it violated what the Commercial Design Guidelines committee wanted to have in place for standards and that the code is not sufficient to prevent someone from painting their business red.

 

Commissioner Krebs wanted to know if minor site plans fell under Commercial Design Standards.

 

Commissioner Haase replied, yes and that the intent was to prevent certain acts, like a business being painted bright red. He gave the example of a business on 23rd street that had gravel driveways and if they want to do interior remodeling they would have to bring the entire site up to code. Commissioner Haase felt that this prevents people from doing updates to their property but also wants to prevent people from painting their business red.

 

Ms. Stogsdill stated that the Planning Commission already struck color from the code when it was adopted.

 

Commissioner Finkeldei suggested on page 11 on top (3) where it says “minor modification…” to be modified to say “minor site plan.”

 

Mr. Rexwinkle stated that if there is no existing site plan on file then a standard site plan would be needed for minor changes. A minor site plan can only be done when there is an existing site plan on file.

 

Commissioner Finkeldei stated on page 11 (3A) the word “shall” be replaced with “are eligible” because (3A) should be consistent with 2. On page 31 the word “significantly” is used twice.

 

Commissioner Burress said he had the same reaction that the League of Women Voters did that the eligibility sections were hard to read. The way it is written would be hard to read for an outsider.

 

Commissioner Krebs asked Commissioner Burress if he had specific suggestions for changes?

 

Commissioner Burress replied no, he just wanted staff to reword things to make it simple to read.

 

Commissioner Harris stated that a builder should not have to get a permit to paint their building.

 

Commissioner Haase said that it was a very difficult regulation to implement but that there may be a need for something else besides site plans within commercial districts.

 

Commissioner Harkins asked if the Commission was delegating staff to clean up the wordage so that they would not have to see this again?

 

Commissioner Krebs replied, correct.

 

ACTION TAKEN

Motioned by Commissioner Finkeldei, seconded by Commissioner Harris to approve TA-10-11-06 and forward a recommendation for approval of the proposed revisions to Articles 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 13 and 17 of the “Development Code, July 1, 2006 Edition,” to the City Commission.

 

Motion unanimously carried 7-0. (Commissioner Eichhorn left the meeting at 8:40pm)