Agenda - Council - 11/12/2014 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

area Tn summary, the Planning Commission is looking for a neutral. third-9arty analysis of the information provided to the City thus far. Center to the discussion of Ordinance #14-14 and the underlying zoning standard for Floor Area Ratio has been assumptions made by potential prospects and the City's preferred brokerage firm, CBRE that structure parking ramps are not feasible in the current marketplace without some form of public subsidy. The Planning Commission simply wants to ensure that the City Council has sufficient, pertinent data to support this assumption. Finally, the Planning Commission wants to ensure that the City Council has exhausted all potential funding sources to aide in the construction of public parking ramps before making the final policy decision. Aesthetics: The Planning Commission has expressed concern about the aesthetic implications of the amendment. The original intent of the FAR requirement was to reduce the size/square footage of surface parking lots in favor of increasing the size of active buildings. Part of that concern is solved with orientation of buildings. The Planning Commission desires that the City Council consider and acknowledge that there are potential visual implications of the policy decision. Citizen Input: The three (3) Planning Commissioners also expressed a desire to seek additional citizen input to the policy decision, as it appears to be an important issue for the community. It was stated that this policy decision has potential implications to not only the COR-1 Sub -District, but has secondary effects on the overall COR, and perhaps the broader community. Existing Locations Available under Current Zoning: Individual Planning Commission members have also questioned the need for this amendment, as other geographic areas of The COR would permit this style of high -density development without the need for amending the COR-1 Sub -District. Of note: many areas within the COR-4 Sub -District north of The Draw Park & Amphitheater would be appropriate areas under current zoning for this style of high -density residential. Alternatives The following alternatives are available for the City Council on November 12, 2014: 1. Postpone action on the amendment as suggested by the Planning Commission direct Staff to bring back Ordinance #14-14 to a future meeting with the additional financial information as noted above. 2. Adopt Ordinance #14-14 as presented. a. Note: Staff recommends that the City Council acknowledge the feedback provided by the Planning Commission and discuss as part of the case whether the City Council feels that adequate financial information to support the policy decision has been made and that said information is accurate and well -reviewed. 3. Do not adopt Ordinance #14-14. 4. Amend Ordinance #14-14. a. The outcome of this alternative will depend on the specific amendment to the Ordinance. Amending the ordinance may require re -introduction or possibly a new Public Hearing depending on the scale.