►
From YouTube: Planning & Development Committee Meeting 10/12/2015
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
Item
p,
1
is
ordinance
120
dash,
0
dash
15
regarding
a
zoning
ordinance
text,
amendment
for
payday
loan
establishments
and
the
plan
commission
and
staff
have
recommended
that
the
city
council
adopt
this
ordinance
to
clarify
the
existing
distance
requirement
between
payday
loan
and
consumer
loan
establishments.
The
proposed
amendment
will
make
it
easier
for
potential
businesses
to
learn
about
the
distance
requirement.
At
the
same
time
they
find
out
in
which
district
the
use
is
allowed,
which
is
currently
only
in
the
sea
to
commercial
district.
A
Thank
you,
I'm,
seeing
the
lights.
Is
him
all
in
favor
of
this
being
introduced
tonight.
C
Item
p2
ordinance,
120
10,
15
zoning
ordinance
text,
amendment
regarding
height
requirements
for
planned
developments
in
the
d3
downtown
core
development
district
Plan,
Commission
and
staff
recommends
City
Council
adoption
of
ordinance
120
10
15,
a
zoning
ordinance
text
amendment
to
specify
that
for
planned
developments
in
the
d3
district,
the
height
of
up
to
four
stories
or
40
feet,
whichever
is
less
of
parking
levels,
may
be
excluded
from
the
calculation
of
building
height
to
match
the
current
regulations
in
other
downtown
zoning
districts.
I
move
introduction.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair
members
of
committee
good
evening.
This
is
just
a
brief
overview
of
the
proposed
text.
Amendment
I
apologize
for
the
colors,
so
these
are
the
existing
downtown
height
restrictions
for
projects
that
are
not
approved
as
planned
development.
So
these
are
the
underlying
zoning
restrictions.
As
you
can
see,
the
parking
levels.
D
D
So
these
are
the
underlying
zoning
restrictions
on
the
height,
as
you
can
see,
the
parking
levels
of
exception
for
the
first
four
levels
of
parking
if
they
are
provided
in
a
building
or
40
feet,
whichever
is
less,
they
are
exempt
from
the
overall
building
height
calculation,
the
d2
d3
and
then
D
for
districts.
However,
this
is
what
adds
to
the
confusion,
because
most
of
the
projects
downtown
have
to
be
approved
as
planned
developments
because
big
days
in
their
scale
and
for
planned
developments.
D
The
this
exception
does
not
apply
to
the
plan
development
in
the
d3
district,
as
you
can
see
in
all
other
downtown
districts,
up
to
four
levels
of
parking
or
40
feet
are
exempt
from
the
overall
building
height
calculations
within
d1
d2
and
then
in
the
d4,
regardless.
If
there
is
residential
or
non-residential,
the
yellow
color
represents
the
additional
height
allowance
that
can
be
allowed
by
the
City
Council
on
top
of
what
the
underlying
zoning
allows.
D
So
what
this
really
means
is
that
the
code
allows
for
taller
buildings
on
the
periphery,
which
is
the
downtown
no
D
for
transitional
district,
as
opposed
to
the
d3,
which
is
it
the
core
downtown
district.
That's
basically
centered
around
the
Davis
Street
stations.
So
basically,
what
staff
is
proposing
is
to
add
the
same
type
of
exception
that
it's
currently
applied
to
two
other
downtown
districts
to
the
d3
district.
D
So
for
the
first
four
levels
of
parking
or
40
feet,
whichever
is
less
to
be
exempt
from
the
overall
parking
calculation,
we
believe
that
this
would
add
to
the
consistent
building
Qaeda
calculation
across
all
downtown
districts.
It's
also
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan
at
the
downtown
plan
that
call
for
taller
buildings
and
higher
density
within
the
core
of
the
downtown
rather
than
on
the
periphery,
and
this
would
also
allow
for
a
more
consistent
and
equitable
way
of
reviewing
project
across
the
downtown.
D
A
E
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
As
we
were
talking
about
the
downtown
plan,
we
were
talking
about
whether
or
not
the
concept
of
a
wedding
cake
made
sense
and
the
various
consultants
were
recommending
that
municipalities
are
moving
away
from
the
wedding
cake
and
placing
taller
buildings,
spacing
them
at
slightly
different
locations
within
a
downtown
so
that
you
didn't
have
a
concentration
of
tall
buildings
right
in
the
center.
E
The
concern
for
my
ward
is
that
this
includes
70,
a
church
which
is
the
very
controversial
site
when
you
look
at
where
d3
is
its
kind
of
weaving
around
the
center
of
the
downtown,
so
I
I'm
not
I'm,
not
sure
this
appears
to
be
a
housekeeping
matter,
but
I
think
it
has
greater
ramifications
than
that.
So
it's
not
something
I
can
support
at
this
moment.
All.
A
Any
other
comments
it's
been
moved
and,
second,
all
in
favor
of
introducing
this
say,
I
any
opposed.
A
E
Ordinance
130
10
15
granting
an
extension
to
a
special
use
for
a
single-family
detached
dwelling
at
15
13
Greenleaf
city
staff
recommends
adoption
of
ordinance
130
10
15,
to
extend
the
time
to
begin
renovation
for
a
single-family
detached
dwelling
originally
approved
in
November
2014
ordinance,
130
10
15
grants
approval
to
obtain
a
building
permit
and
begins
construction
by
june
twenty-fourth
2016.
It's
for
introduction.
I
move
introduction.
Second,.
A
It's
been
moving
a
second,
we
have
one
speaker.
I'm
will
take
that
before
we
take
discussion.
C
A
F
You,
madam
chair
members
of
the
committee,
just
on
behalf
of
the
resident
he's
asking
for
more
time
due
to
personal
reasons,
and
so
I
am
familiar
with
a
project
in
my
ward,
there's
no
I
haven't
heard
any
complaints
from
any
of
the
residents.
So
hopefully
we
can
move
to
suspend
the
rules
on
this
particular
item
and
move
forward
with
giving
him
the
time
that
he
needs
to
complete
the
project.
A
No
signal
the
lights
all
in
favor,
any
opposed
all
right.
I
think
that
concludes
our
business.
For
this
evening
in
planning
and
development
on
council
meeting
should
start
in
five
minutes.
Ten
minutes
10
minutes
it's
been
moving
a
second
to
adjourn.