PC 062619 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Ritter seconded, and said he would push against using the word "two-story" and "three-story' because if they keep to the number of feet, this is what the Task Force discussed. ACTION: There was unanimous consensus that the Planning Commission support the City Council's direction for the MU-T District for 36 feet maximum height and 125 maximum Floor-Area-Ratio. Commissioner Brown referred to "stories" and stated for the record, the City Council is putting this in there to be responsive to all of the feedback from all people. The reality is some of the public and architects love to talk about feet but everyone in day-to-day life talks about stories. They are trying to relate it to something people understand. The purpose of public government and public service is to produce things that people understand and can relate to. This is why he leans more towards the City Council for the purposes of moving this meeting along. Chair Allen suggested taking corner lots or residential visibility as the next topic of discussion. Mr. Beaudin suggested discussing story poles and visual simulations. Story Poles and Visual Simulations: Chair Allen said she was in full support of the staff recommendation that requires story poles and visuals. The Planning Commission requires these on most of their controversial projects anyway, such as the project at 273 Spring Street, but they wanted to do a better job. Commissioner Brown said he thinks it adds a new burden. If the project requires a PUD then he would support the Planning Commission requiring story poles. But, outside of the PUD process he did not believe it was necessary to regulate it. Commissioner Ritter agreed story poles are useful in certain spots. He likes the idea of the picture visuals and commented that the Planning Commission also had drone visuals presented in the past. Chair Allen asked if staff was proposing this on every project or mainly those that would fall into the PUD category. Mr. Beaudin said staff is asking for guidance on where to apply it and to what level. Based upon recent projects, the types of story poles that are erected vary greatly. So, staff would be establishing standards to show how story poles should demonstrate the massing so there is consistency and so it is clear to the applicant and the Planning Commission. Commissioner Ritter asked if this could be addressed during PUD process. Mr. Beaudin said staff would like to have clear direction to applicants about what story poles should look like and what types of projects the Planning Commission wants to see story poles, and it could be a PUD. Commissioner Ritter asked for standards of other cities and asked if there was a minimum or maximum level. Planning Commission Minutes Page 11 of 27 June 26, 2019 Page 10 of 27 June 26, 2019 lanning process and he voiced concerns with this and noted that we are simply adding to the list of requirements for homeowners and developers. He indicated he does not want to over-regulate and recommended breaking down the topics more. Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 of 27 June 26, 2019 ntial does not already exist since two properties side by side could have very different requirements. He also asked that outdoor seating be a Zoning Administrator (ZA) decision and not a Planning Commission decision. Lastly, requiring commercial to wrap around the corner seems like overkill where this is an issue that can be resolved by the ZA. Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 of 27 June 26, 2019 ne 26, 2019