PC 012611 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Williams replied that a 29-foot setback was utilized. Commissioner Pentin further inquired if these types of buildings could still fit within the space under the guidelines with the 29-foot setback on Willow Road and 10-foot setback on the opposite side. Mr. Williams said yes and added that it could achieve 30 dwelling units per acre. Ms. Stern then presented her report, stating that the Design Guidelines the Commission received in its packet and the version Mr. Williams just described is Draft No. 6. She noted that this version incorporated a number of changes resulting from the Joint Session and a follow-up Task Force meeting on January 6, 2011. She then discussed the issues as listed on page 4 of the staff report. Option which does not significantly change the existing curb line on Owens Drive. An Owens Drive option showing the existing curb lines and median, and therefore requiring minimal change to the configuration of Owens Drive has been included (page 18 of the Standards and Design Guidelines). Minimum height of retail buildings. The suggestion was to have a minimum height for retail buildings which would create a comfortable sense of enclosure on the street. A wide street like Owens Drive will require some substantial buildings on the edges to create a sense of enclosed space that would make it a more comfortable pedestrian experience. A 25-foot minimum height requirement for principal structures has been included (page 12 of the Standards and Design Guidelines) Specific or Generalized Permitted Uses. There were numerous discussions regarding making the list of uses more general or specific, what uses should be prohibited, and what uses are subject to a Conditional Use Permit. There was a struggle with prohibiting liquor stores because there was a desire to allow wine-tasting, and no distinction was drawn between liquor stores and wine bar sales that the Task Force wanted to allow. A revised list of permitted uses, conditionally permitted uses, and prohibited uses has been established (pp. 15-16 of the Standards and Design Guidelines). Need for some flexibility regarding setbacks. This flexibility exists with the language under "Review Process" which provides for flexibility in implementing both the standards and the guidelines (p. 5 of the Standards and Design Guidelines). Appropriate language for guidelines. There are no "shalls" as these are guidelines, rather than standards, and are clearly more flexible. However, some "shalls" were changed to "shoulds" (pp. 5, 6, 13, 33, and 49 of the Standards and Design Guidelines). PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, January 26, 2011 Page 14 of 50