Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2021 05 13

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 8, 2021 Page 5 of 7 Hoefner stated that he was looking for a set of defaults that governed amplified noise and hours of operation to establish a baseline set of assumptions, to be adjusted if there were particular circumstances. Williams stated that this discussion originated in the Commission applying different rules to different business downtown, which had not felt fair. She suggested having a set of criteria applicable to everyone and making it more black-and-white than it is now. Ritchie added that this change could affect some of the older SRUs without sound regulations. Zuccaro added that he did not know that the City could retrospectively enforce different hours between the Code and the existing SRUs. He suggested using criteria that changed based on distance from residential. Zuccaro noted that under the current standards some business-owners worked with neighbors during the SRU process, which had pluses and minuses. He and Planner Ritchie clarified that the SRU was mostly tied to the business itself. Moline asked if it would make sense to put Commissioner Hoefner’s baselines in a zoning overlay. Ritchie replied that the downtown was a specified area with a legal description so it could be possible. She observed that not every property that abuts residential was in a transition area. Zuccaro added that there were some areas outside downtown that were immediately adjacent to residential. Moline said he was comfortable with the discretion that came with the SRU in downtown and other places. He just wondered if the overlay could be the mechanism that provided the baseline that Commissioner Hoefner was talking about. Ritchie stated that the Commission did pay attention from a consistency perspective even though it wasn’t codified and Commissioner Moline appreciated that comparative examples of SRUs were included in staff reports. Ritchie stated that staff would check back in on the issue in October. She shared the next item which was the PUD extension timeline. Williams stated that the first extension was reasonable but she wanted to prevent the repeat offenders because those were hard calls to make. Rice stated that the Commission approved PUDs with an eye toward the future and also toward current conditions, which changed. He thought that one principle of the timeline should be a time after which the PUD had to be re-reviewed and another principle should be that if the development were in progress the Commission did not get in the way.