Laserfiche WebLink
Chairperson Levine requested to see a map of the proposed E -3 zoning district. <br />Planning Consultant Goodroad reviewed a map of the proposed area with the Commission noting <br />it was south of Highway 10. <br />Commissioner Brauer questioned why Staff was proposing revisions for this zoning district. He <br />indicated the proposed revisions may make future development more difficult. <br />Development Services Manager Gladhill explained the existing zoning for the subject property <br />was R -1 Residential. Through the Comprehensive Plan review, it was suggested that this area be <br />turned into corporate campuses without outside storage, which currently was not allowed in the <br />E -1 or E -2 zoning districts. <br />Commissioner Bauer agreed with Commissioner Brauer and expressed concern with creating <br />another zoning district. He recommended the site be either E -1 or E -2 and that modifications be <br />made if necessary. <br />Chairperson Levine inquired why Staff was proposing a more restrictive zoning district. <br />Planning Consultant Goodroad stated the idea for this district was to create a distinguished <br />district beyond the E -1 and E -2 areas in the City. The area would special for corporate campuses, <br />which was recommended by the Comprehensive Plan. Staff was not proposing to change the E -1 <br />or E -2 zoning districts at this time. <br />Chairperson Levine questioned what was special or different in the E -3 district. <br />Planning Consultant Goodroad described a vision for the district in detail with the Commission. <br />She indicated the corporate campus would attract multiple users that would have an interior <br />space focused for office, educational and technological uses. There would be common amenities <br />with open space. She referred to several campuses in the metro area that fit this zoning. <br />Development Services Manager Gladhill stated the City's current employment districts were <br />largely built out and the proposed E -3 district would create a new employment district that would <br />attract corporate campuses. Another difference with the E -3 versus the E -2 is that it would be <br />more office and less manufacturing. He recommended the item be tabled if the Commission <br />wanted to revise the E -1 or E -2 zoning districts as this would allow Staff time to properly review <br />and revise City Code. <br />Chairperson Levine asked how the Commission would like to proceed. <br />Commissioner Schiller supported the E -3 district moving forward with the conditional uses <br />recommended by Staff. <br />Planning Commission /September 6, 2012 <br />Page 8 of 18 <br />