Planning Commission

2/23/2023 - Minutes I. Call to Order Members Present: Mike O’Brien, Chair; Joe Perron; Tommie Murray; Brendan Sage City Staff Present: Eric Vorwald Guests Present: Kristine Lott, Mayor Call to Order by: Mike O’Brien Meeting Start Time: 6:35 PM Minutes Recorded by: Eric Vorwald II. Changes to the Agenda None III. Public Comment None IV. Approve Previous Meeting Minutes Based on members not being present at the February 9 th meeting, it was decided to table this item until the next meeting. V. Continued Discussion on Unified Land Use and Development Regulations – Article IV Eric provided a brief update on the discussion from the previous meeting and highlighted several changes that were made. He then introduced the next topic for discussion related to bicycle parking. Eric indicated that Abby provided significant input into the draft language on bicycle parking and noted that this section had significant changes included. The Planning Commission discussed and debated the requirements for both short-term and long-term bicycle parking including the number of required spaces. Eric referenced other projects that have included bicycle parking inside the buildings in dedicated rooms. Brendan provided examples of storage in multi-unit buildings that can serve to accommodate secure bicycle parking. After additional discussion on bicycle parking, Eric indicated that he would make changes for clarification of the language. The Planning Commission also agreed that additional discussion on the required bicycle parking would be necessary to ensure the intent was clear. This included a review of the square footage standards for both short-term and long-term parking. Next, Eric provided information on a new section related to changes of use. He indicated that this section was being added to ensure that existing buildings could change uses without the need to add parking unless specific conditions were met. These conditions included new residential units or new square footage. He also indicated that depending on the use, it may require site plan approval, which would trigger the need for the entire site to be brought into conformity with all the regulations, not just parking. The Planning Commission generally supported this addition with a few modifications for clarity. The last item for this section that was discussed included a review of the diagrams that were  need to add parking unless specific conditions were met. These conditions included new residential units or new square footage. He also indicated that depending on the use, it may require site plan approval, which would trigger the need for the entire site to be brought into conformity with all the regulations, not just parking. The Planning Commission generally supported this addition with a few modifications for clarity. The last item for this section that was discussed included a review of the diagrams that were included. Eric indicated that his understand was these were a carry-over from a previous version of the regulations and may be better suited in the section on site plan review. The reasoning for this was that most of the information in these diagrams and related sections were specific to uses that would require site plan review and therefore may be more appropriate in that section. The Planning Commission generally agreed with this assessment and moving these illustrations to Section 6.6 for site plan review. After the Planning Commission concluded their discussion of Section 4.12, Eric asked for input on how to proceed with the proposed changes. He indicated that additional discussion was needed on Design Review, and provided an option where the proposed amendments to Article IV would move forward with the existing design review language under Section 4.4, and then the Planning Commission would begin detailed discussions on proposed amendments to this section. The other option presented was that the discussion on changes for design review would occur and be included with the other amendments to Article IV before going forward with a public hearing. The Planning Commissioners determined that it would be best to advance the proposed language in Article IV to a public hearing, with the existing Design Review language so those changes could be considered now. They wanted to ensure that if this process was followed, they could begin on design review discussions as soon as possible. Mayor Lott indicated that there were no anticipated priorities that would supersede a discussion on design review as a new Council would be seated in March and the Council was beginning to plan for their policy and priority setting. With this in mind, it was anticipated that no new priorities would be forwarded to the Planning Commission that would delay their discussion on design review. With this additional context, the Planning Commission agreed to review the proposed changes to Article IV, including incentives for historic preservation first, and then begin focused discussions on design review. Eric indicated he would bring the latest version of Section 4.1 thru 4.12 for review at the next meeting including definitions and language on incentives that will be included in Article V. VI. City Updates Mayor Lott updated the Planning Commission on Council activities including discussions on the proposed budget, public hearings for the voter backed petition for a charter change related to just cause eviction, updates on Main Street redevelopment, and progress on Lot 7D redevelopment. Eric provided updates on the recent Development Review Board meeting. VII. Other Business Eric indicated that the next meeting would be on March 9 th and that materials would be sent out next week. The Mayor indicated that Council would be seeking input from the Planning Commission on progress related to Master Plan Goals to inform their discussion on setting priorities for the next fiscal year. VIII. Adjourn Motion by: Joe Second: Brendan Meeting End Time: 8:05 PM Second: Brendan Meeting End Time: 8:05 PM