HomeMy Public PortalAboutMinutes - 2004/10/26 - RegularPLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
• OCTOBER 26, 2004
INITIATION:
1. CALL TO ORDER
Pursuant to the Agenda posted October 8, 2004, Chairman Griffiths called the
meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, October
26, 2004.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
3. ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners: Le Berthon, Blum, Seibert, Yu, Griffiths
Also Present: City Attorney Martin and Community Development Director Dawson
Assistant Planner Gulick, and Assistant Planner Liu
4. TIME FOR THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO SPEAK
• 5. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES October 12, 2004
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS SUBMITTED
Commissioner Blum noted a correction; the meeting of October 12, 2004, was not adjourned
by Chairman Griffiths but rather by Vice - Chairman Blum. Commissioner Seibert moved to
approve the minutes as corrected, seconded by Vice- Chairman Blum. Chairman Griffiths
refrained from approving the minutes because he was absent at the meeting of October 12,
2004.
6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
7. NEW BUSINESS:
A. DISCUSSION ITEM:
THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL CONDUCT A
STUDY SESSION RELATIVE TO THE ON -GOING
CONSULTANT STUDY OF RESIDENTIAL DESIGN
CRITERIA
41) Director Dawson — Read the Staff Report dated October 26, 2004.
Chairman Griffiths — Asked the consultant if they had a presentation.
Planning Commission
October 26, 2004
Page 2
Mark Brodeur. — Stated that they did have a presentation.
Chairman Griffiths — Asked if there were any questions before the presentation began.
Mark Brodeur— Gave a presentation with the following outline:
1. Project Purpose and Today's Workshop
2. Summary of June 29, 2004 workshop
Explained the visual preference survey that over 150 people participated in.
Text Questions result summary
Visual Preference Results Summary
3. Summary of September 23, 2004 workshop
4. Frequently asked questions
Why was this process selected?
Concerns about being able to add on to or modify their home
Can the city tighten up and further restrict the size of homes
Could the city actually prohibit two -story homes in the future
Could the city set up a board or commission to review the proposed individual home
plans
5. Initial ideas and concepts
Adjust lot coverage as incentive for single -story homes.
Require second story front setbacks for all two -story structures except for genuine
"period" architectural styles which do not have such setbacks.
6. Planning Commission Input:
The Commissioners provided their input relative to the current development
standards and suggested specific areas where improvements might be possible.
Staff also suggested specific code amendments which would address recurring
problems associated with ongoing development. More specifically, the following
items were discussed:
♦ Fine tune the second story setback requirements for each zone to provide for
greater variation in architectural appearance.
♦ Fine -tune the front yard setback for the second story level so as to provide
better architectural relief and reduce the appearance of bulkiness.
• Draft criteria to limit the monolithic appearance of front entryways while
encouraging more traditional "front porches ".
♦ Draft criteria to better restrict the amount of paving on all Tots while better
ensuring more permeable lot area so as to reduce runoff and increase
permeability.
• Devise appropriate criteria to increase the amount of front yard landscaping
and decrease the amount of driveway paving. (e.g. re- examine current criteria
for u -shape driveways, etc.)
N: \Word \Department \CDD \MINS \PC MINUTES 2004 \PC MINUTES October 26, 2004.doc
"
P l a n n i n g C o m m i s s i o n
O c t o b e r 2 6 , 2 0 0 4
P a g e 3
f& C o n s i d e r a l l o w i n g t a n d e m p a r k i n g i n c e r t a i n i n s t a n c e s s o a s t o r e d u c e t h e
p r o m i n e n c e o f g a r a g e s .
f& I n c r e a s e t h e w i d t h o f r e q u i r e d g u e s t p a r k i n g s p a c e s i n t h e m u l t i p l e f a m i l y z o n e s
s o a s t o m a k e g u e s t p a r k i n g m o r e u s e r f r i e n d l y .
f& D e v i s e i n c e n t i v e s a n d b o n u s e s t o e n c o u r a g e l o t c o n s o l i d a t i o n , r e w a r d
d e v e l o p m e n t o f w i d e r T o t s a n d l i m i t t h e r a n g e o f d e v e l o p m e n t o n n a r r o w l o t s
( e . g . r e q u i r e t h a t a l l f u t u r e s u b d i v i s i o n s c o m p l y w i t h c e r t a i n m i n i m u m l o t w i d t h
r e q u i r e m e n t s o r l i m i t d e v e l o p m e n t o f e x t r e m e l y n a r r o w T o t s t o s i n g l e s t o r y
d w e l l i n g ( s ) .
f& C o n s i d e r a l l o w i n g b a l c o n i e s o n t h e f r o n t f a c a d e s o f d w e l l i n g s , w h e r e t h e v i e w
f r o m s u c h b a l c o n i e s w o u l d b e o n t o a p u b l i c s t r e e t o r t h e f r o n t y a r d a r e a o f
a b u t t i n g T o t s .
f& C r e a t e a C . U . P . p r o c e s s t o a l l o w "