PC 062619 - Laserfiche WebLink

Chair Allen said lastly, staff indicated it was likely for Barone's to come in with design review. She asked what the difference was between Design Review and a PUD as it relates to the Planning Commission and the City Council being able to ask for amenities in return for the project. Mr. Beaudin said a PUD is a legislative change which allows for more discretion and more ability to extract from applicants. The Design Review is a more straight forward process. His final point is that if a decision is brought to the ballot, a legislative change can be brought to the ballot. A quasi-judicial decision or a more administrative decision cannot be brought to the voters after a decision is made by the City Council or the Planning Commission. ACTION: Chair Allen took a straw poll which resulted in a vote of 2-1 to strike the requirement for a PUD on all residential projects, with Chair Allen opposed. Residential Height Limits (inclusion of three-story versus two-story height limits) per Commissioner Brown: Commissioner Brown said both Commissioner Allen and Commissioner Ritter indicated earlier they do not want to require stories in the recommendations, and Chair Allen was the swing vote. Chair Allen said she agrees with the City Council recommendation, and the proposed staff position in that two stories is the standard and three stories is the exception. Commissioner Brown spoke about his work on the Planning Commission as a representative for the community at large, and residents want the character of the City to remain. Commissioner Brown made a motion to recommend including the three-story and two-story maximum against the four overlay districts which the City Council amended. Mr. Beaudin referred to agenda report page 5 of 15 and he confirmed Commissioner Brown's motion was in support of making the recommendation to the City Council consistent with their April 16 and May 7 summary in the table for height and stories. Commissioner Brown said they discussed the MU-T and agreed to recommend 36 feet and 125 FAR, and he confirmed this was what he was motioning, except without the PUD. Commissioner Ritter said he agreed with the verbiage with the exception of including about the maximum number of stories. Commissioner Brown asked if there was agreement to strike the proposed language that called out allowing additional height through a PUD; and if there was support from two Planning Commissioners for adding back the reference to maximum stories. Chair Allen stated she will second the motion with the exception she could not support the striking through a PUD. Mr. Beaudin clarified the Planning Commission was just voting on the 30 feet and two stories. Planning Commission Minutes Page 19 of 27 June 26, 2019 der to avoid the high costs associated with the PUD. He did not want to burn staff time and resident dollars on doing PUDs for a lot of projects that are outside of the ones the Planning Commission is worried about. Planning Commission Minutes Page 18 of 27 June 26, 2019 oning request Planning Commission Minutes Page 17 of 27 June 26, 2019 hair Allen said in using something like that as an example she asked if it goes to the ZA who then review it and decides it could be controversial and bumps it to the Planning Commission. Planning Commission Minutes Page 16 of 27 June 26, 2019 rap 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