PC 062619 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Ritter said he did not want to rule from the bench. Chair Allen disagreed and said there is no ground floor residential on a street front, and a corner has two street fronts. To her, it is really clear if they keep it simple. Commissioner Ritter said the Task Force had the same simple recommendation too. Commissioner Brown said the Task Force recommendation talks about 50 feet commercial on the frontage on Main Street and side streets, whereas the City Council broke it down into downtown commercial which, by definition would include those corner ones and the mixed-use transitional addresses Peters Avenue. The whole point of transitional is that there can be mixed-use. Commissioner Ritter stated the Task Force voted 9-0 on ground floor residential use. Chair Allen noted that two months before the Task Force voted at its February meeting, it had directed almost the opposite: to support absolutely no ground floor residential downtown. Commissioner Brown said the point is both the February 26 Task Force and April/May City Council recommendations are allowing ground floor residential and commercial. The question is whether or not you want to break it down by downtown commercial or a generic 50-foot recommendation for commercial frontage. In both cases, it allows residential behind commercial and trying to restrict residential on Main Street. Chair Allen said the question is that on a corner lot there is a Salt Craft-type project and ground floor residential behind the St. Mary's Street side on that project. What you have is all residential right on the street front for Peters Avenue and at least two other long properties like those on Mr. Beaudin's list, including the mortgage company across the street that is almost the same lot size as where Salt Craft is located. To be clear, if the Planning Commission was to allow the long side of that corner to go all residential, they would end up turning the east side of Peters Avenue into a predominantly residential area and not giving it an opportunity to go more commercial. She thinks the City Council clearly wants the commercial streets they are trying to protect for commercial to be commercial. If residential does not fit behind there then the lot does not make sense for residential, and this is where she comes out. Commissioner Brown said to be honest, the City Council's definition with the same intent is a better definition because it is clearer and broken down, but this is just his view. He thinks in both cases they are sending a message they are allowing residential behind commercial, but they do not front the main commercial street. Chair Allen asked if Commissioner Brown was saying that on a corner lot both sides need to be fronted with commercial. Commissioner Brown stated this is a question specific to Downtown Commercial as it relates to Mixed-Use Transitional. He thought the Planning Commission should not prevent someone if they have a lot that fronts two streets on Peters Avenue to not have housing facing the street, because that is in alignment with the Downtown Design Guidelines. They want front Planning Commission Minutes Page 13 of 27 June 26, 2019 ties 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