Minutes 04-07-2015 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Perdita Holtz said some of the Small Area Plan recommendations are not part of the proposal as they were recommended for exclusion by the group of residents. Commissioner Jacobs clarified he was not discussing the recommendations but rather clarity of language. He said some of the changes in language make the document very difficult to read. He gave the example of 6.6.3 c 1 as one that is very difficult to understand. Perdita Holtz said it was clear to her. Commissioner Price asked for clarification of item e.4 of page 34 regarding a "digital sign not being permitted except as an incidental addition to a permitted sign". Perdita Holtz said a primary sign cannot be a digital one in the Efland Overlay District. Commissioner Price clarified that a digital sign is permitted as long as it is not a primary one. She asked who determines the classification of a sign. Perdita Holtz said such details are determined during the sign permitting process by staff. Commissioner Price said the reason behind the restrictions seemed important to mention. She said if the restrictions are for safety then it should be stated as such followed by a description of the permitted use of digital signs. Perdita Holtz said the restrictions were not only for safety reasons but also for community character. Commissioner porosin asked about the intention of attachment 6, the Resident Group Input. He asked if it was to simply show where the community agreed or disagreed or rather changes that were made based on the community input. Perdita Holtz said any changes made as a result of the Resident Group Input were indicated in the right hand column of the chart. Commissioner porosin said the adopted changes are in the right hand column. Perdita Holtz said the changes in the right hand column are included in attachment 3, recommended for adoption consideration. A motion was made by Commissioner Pelissier, seconded by Commissioner Rich to close the public hearing. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Commissioner Rich asked Commissioner Jacobs to clarify his concerns about the language from the first group being changed by the second group. Commissioner Jacobs said most of the changes proposed seemed acceptable. He said he had concern when the changed language does not affect current residents but rather shows support of chain franchises or by allowing developers to back away from requirements such as providing sidewalks. He stated respect for those who worked on the language but fears that softening the language from "shall" to "may" allows for requirements to be backed away from. He said restricting what is permissible by a franchise store is acceptable in order to maintain the type of environment that a community desires. He said the current conditions for children walking to school are subpar. He said expecting any new business to address that within their property is a reasonable expectation. Commissioner Rich said the question of sidewalks is very important to allow people and children to walk. She said as new pockets of development appear sidewalks are vital to allow for connection and walkability. She agreed that the language should be stronger than "may".