Minutes by Year and Month

2017 (click to show)
2016 (click to show)
2015 (click to show)
2014 (click to show)
2013 (click to show)
2012 (click to show)
2011 (click to show)
2010 (click to show)
2009 (click to show)
2008 (click to show)
2007 (click to show)
2006 (click to show)
2005 (click to show)
2004 (click to show)
2003 (click to show)
2002 (click to show)
2001 (click to show)
2000 (click to show)
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES

AUGUST 24, 2004


1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Chair Balen called the meeting to order at 6:34 p.m. Chair Balen and Commissioners Perry, Meatzie, and Cvar answered the roll. Commissioners Cutter and Milligan were absent. Commissioner Cowie was sworn in by City Clerk Quinlan and took his seat at the table.
2. CITIZEN COMMENTS AND CONCERNS: None.
3. COMMISSION COMMENTS AND CONCERNS: None.
4. MINUTES: The Commission considered the minutes from the July 27, 2004 meeting. Commissioner Cvar noted two scrivener's errors, which were corrected. Commissioner Meatzie moved to approve the minutes as corrected. Commissioner Cvar seconded, and the motion carried unanimously on a voice vote.
5. CORRESPONDENCE: None.
6. PUBLIC HEARING: Mr. Lewis indicated that the requested additional information had not yet been received, so the Public Hearing on Case File 1-C-PC-04 would be held over to September 28, 2004.
7. DISCUSSION ITEMS:
  Planning Report: Mr. Lewis reviewed the planning report. A brief discussion ensued regarding noxious weeds. Staff referred the Commission to Section 8.08.040 of the Municipal Code.
  Review of Proposed Development Code Additions/Revisions: Mr. Lewis explained that part of the downtown refinement plan was to draft some ordinance language for the downtown area, which resulted in a draft new zoning district now called the "Downtown District". The Planning Commission started discussions last fall, and again in June to make some revisions. The two primary things from the last meeting were the permitted uses (now redrafted) and the suggestion to expand the zone to include all of the existing C-1 district. Chair Balen confirmed the expansion of the Downtown District to include the C-1 zone in that area was agreeable to the Planning Commission, and that at a later date they would take into consideration other commercial areas such as "Old Town" and write up requirements that would cater to the unique properties of that area. Chair Balen moved to include the whole C-1 zone in the Highway 101 area. Commissioner Meatzie seconded, and the motion carried, with Chair Balen and Commissioners Perry, Meatzie and Cowie voting "Aye", Commissioner Cvar voting "Nay". Discussion ensued regarding permitted uses in the Downtown District (DD) zone. Chair Balen suggested that most of the permitted outright uses in a C-1 zone were appropriate, with the exception of (j) mortuaries; (n) signs and advertising; (q) retail sale of sporting goods or bait; and (r) gift shop. He felt that (q) and (r) were already allowed under "retail store or shop". Signs and advertising are addressed by the sign ordinance, and it is probably not necessary therefore to have references in the specific zones. The Commission then discussed allowable conditional uses, and decided that governmental structure or use of land, home occupations, parks, schools, animal hospital, and other similar uses could be allowed. Consensus was favorable to have Mr. Lewis draft the uses to bring back to the next Planning Commission meeting for a vote. The Commission took up the issue of setbacks. Consensus of the Commission was favorable to retaining the language which explained the rationale behind the proposed setbacks. Commissioner Cvar expressed concern about the restrictions in the maximum setback, wondering if the City should be involved in architectural standards. Mr. Lewis explained that the intent is to avoid parking between the street and the building, and to keep pedestrians moving close to the buildings or some outdoor activity (such as pocket parks or plazas). Discussion ensued. Mr. Lewis suggested that any new or substantial improvement to an existing building in the zone come before the Planning Commission for review, as well as any requested exception to the standards such as increasing the front yard setback. The Commission determined that the discussion would be continued at the next meeting, and that the individual Commissioners would review the materials in the meantime. The goal will be to get through 16.34.150 at the next meeting.
8. ADJOURNMENT: At 8:35 p.m., there being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Reda A. Quinlan, City Clerk
APPROVED by the Planning Commission this 28th day of September, 2004.
SIGNED by the Chair this 28th day of September, 2004.
Samuel Balen, Chair