Item A: Minor Code Amendments - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Priority Amendments One of the significant challenges of this process has been the ability to develop a list of potential amendments that is both manageable and representative of the community’s input. In order to facilitate this outcome, the Planning Commission and staff asked for the community’s help in prioritizing the amendments they felt were most important, recognizing the limitations of the project scope. This effort ultimately proved very productive for the Planning Commission in guiding its selection of potential amendments. A synopsis of the 20 potential amendments is provided in the attached matrix. Virtually all of the amendments selected by the Planning Commission, with the exception of the council- related items, were rated by the various stakeholders as high priorities by various community members. In addition, the 20 amendments, as a package, closely reflect the public input received to date. The majority of input and involvement in this process has come from the neighborhood groups and individual residents. Many of the suggested amendments focused on residential-related standards. The Planning Commission’s list of amendments reflects this level of involvement as the vast majority of topics selected by the commission address issues ranked as “high priorities” by the neighborhoods. This includes such topics as the definition of building height, maximum density, lot dimensions, flag and alley access lots, multi-family parking requirements and open space. The Planning Commission also attempted to include amendments that were thematically connected, which better ensures a common direction. For example, many of the suggested amendments address the various definitions around how lots can be configured. Looking at this issue more holistically will enable a more seamless set of standards in the future. The Planning Commission also included the following amendments which the City Council had previously identified as issues it preferred to see addressed in this process. All of these issues have had some level of discussion with the council at previous work sessions and to a great extent, involve enforcement actions which have been tabled pending resolution of these potential amendments. Fence heights on corner lots ? Portable sign standards ? Number of dogs allowed per household (definition of kennel) ? Duplex, triplex and fourplex units in R-1 subdivisions: Allow owner to build single family unit ? instead of multi-family structure previously identified on approved subdivision. Next Steps Although the Planning Commission has selected a list of potential amendments that will move forward in this process, this by no means ensures their adoption. There are several steps ahead in this process that may affect the outcome of each amendment. Following is a synopsis of these next steps: Concept Development : In order to better understand each of these potential suggestions, the next step in this process will be to prepare “white papers” for each of the 20 potential amendments. These white papers will more fully identify the implications associated with each suggested amendment. This will include the mechanical changes needed in the code, potential policy issues, implementation challenges, as well as potential options on how to address the underlying concern. As part of that analysis, it may be determined that the scope of a particular amendment will require some adjustment to ensure it is manageable within this process. Prior to submitting these white papers to the Planning Commission, the project team plan to have further discussions with those community members who suggested the amendments to fully understand the F:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M071010\S071010A.doc