PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING
MINUTES OF MEETING
CALL TO ORDER:
The Chairman called the meeting to order
at 7:00 p.m.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT:
Don Bergwall, John Cunningham, Pete
Griffin, Roger Yoder, Alan Seymour, Paula Bodey. Ken Kraus – excused
OTHERS PRESENT:
David Burke,
Mark Reams, John Gore, Ed Pleasant, Dan Fogt, Leah Sellers, Eric Phillips
OLD
BUSINESS:
New Design Review Code
Mr. Phillips stated the goals
and objectives we set back in June have not changed. We have accomplished everything we said we
were going to accomplish. Mr. Phillips
read the original goals set.
Mr. Phillips stated currently
the ARB reviews all of the permit requests in the Historical area. The Shade Tree Commission reviews all landscaping
plans for the City. In 2003 the Design
Review Board was created. The Planning
Commission also serves as this board.
They review all commercial, industrial and multi-family buildings built
in the city.
Mr. Gore asked if he was
correct in understanding that the Planning Commission serves as two of the
three boards. Mr. Phillips stated
currently there are three different boards.
Mr. Gore asked who of the people here are on the ARB. Mr. Phillips stated Mr. Griffin. Mr. Gore asked who else is on that
board. Mr. Phillips stated he is not
sure who the other members are. Mr. Gore
stated what you are proposing is to leave this body in place and have them review everything and have the other two boards go
away. Mr. Phillips stated yes. Mr. Gore stated he feels City Council needs
to have some input into the appointments.
The only appointments we have now are Shade Tree and that is being done
away with. You are basically leaving
this in the hands of the administration.
Right now that is fine, but you done know who is going to be the next
mayor.
Mr. Seymour stated just to
clarify, Planning Commission is Planning Commission and we are Design Review
Board. It is a separate board even
though it is made up of the same members.
Mr. Phillips stated Shade Tree members will go away, ARB members will go
away and you will have the Planning Commission members which serve on the
Design Review Board. Mr. Phillips stated
what you could do is tweak the ordinance to where City Council could have so
many appointments to the Design Review Board.
Mr. Gore stated he asked the
Charter Review Committee to take a look at the appointments because I think it
should be, on any 7 member board, 4 appointments from administration and 3 from
City Council or visa versa. In this
case, all 7 appointments would be from administration.
Mr. Phillips stated this
discussion was held with the Mayor about a year ago. He is will to listen to you if you would like
appointments to the Design Review Board.
We can change the ordinance to have any make up of the Design Review
Board.
Mr. Gore stated this is no
disrespect to the Planning Commission; we’re just trying to look out for the
future.
Mr. Phillips stated the highlights
of some of the changes were we wanted to change the Architectural Review
District to the Historic Uptown Marysville Review District to keep this
consistent with the goals of URT. It
expanded the area as well. The reason
for the expansion was because we wanted to include any structures that are
historically significant.
Mr. Phillips stated some of
the other changes were realigning duties and making the City’s Design Review
Board to review all commercial, manufacturing, and multi-family, create basic design guidelines that are not currently
specified in the code, review design and color guidelines that will be used in
evaluating applications. Allow fast
track approvals, which we currently do not have. We placed stricter guidelines on demolition of
buildings. It also adds the Secretary of
Interior guidelines which we are required to have.
Mr. Phillips stated in
chapter 1140, the duties were realigned to give those powers to the Design
Review to review all landscaping. It
defined better what a new structure vs. a substantial expansion is. It reduced a lot of repetitive language. It allows for negotiation, if topographical
or special circumstances do not permit landscaping.
Mr. Phillips stated chapter
1144 was also updated. It now requires
professionals to be on the board. It
updated certain sections for clarity; it refers developers back to chapter 1136
and 1140 and allows for standard to be applicable to any new zoning district.
Mr. Phillips explained the
color coding of the changes on the packet they have received.
Mr. Phillips stated he is
only going to go over the changes tonight.
In 1136, page one, there was not a whole lot changed to the meat of it
that was changed. On page two, the word
alteration was removed because it was repetitive. We defined maintenance. On page three we decided to put the map in
the ordinance instead of just putting in a description.
Mr. Phillips stated something
the ARB had not previously done was accept color and design guidelines. It is the goal of the Design Review Board
(DRB) to adopt guidelines as soon as possible.
On the next page it talks about what maintenance is. I also defines fast track approval is.
Mr. Seymour stated this is where
it talks about a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) and what it is. Mr. Phillips stated a COA is any major
environmental change as defined, which requires DRB approval. This also allows for Fast Track Approval
(FTA), where it would only get approved by the zoning inspector. They will still have to meet all of the
guidelines the DRB establishes.
Mr. Cunningham stated this
also allows the DRB to bring the businesses in the uptown area up to these
standards.
Mr. Fogt stated on top of
page two under (c), residential properties are exempt? Mr. Cunningham stated it is only for the
commercial properties in the area defined.
Mrs. Sellers asked why they
did not consider extending the map down
Mr. Reams asked what about
the demolition of residential structures in this area to make room for
commercial. Would you need a
permit? Mr. Phillips stated yes because
it would be a change of use. Mr. Reams
stated but what if you demolish the houses and let it sit for 6 months and then
want to put up a new building. Mr.
Cunningham stated demolition is discussed later in this chapter. Mr. Reams stated the reason he asks is should
the area be extended to cover the historic homes in the area.
Mr. Phillips stated the way
this is written, the demolition of any single family structure is
permitted. Mr. Bergwall asked even if
the house has historic value. Mr.
Phillips stated yes.
Mrs. Sellers stated what
about the Mom and Pop place that says all they want to do is paint their
building but they can’t afford the $250.00.
That could lead to bad publicity for the city. Mr. Phillips stated it would actually go
through fast track and only be $50.00, but also you would have to be very
careful if you were going to word it so the smaller businesses had a smaller
fee. Mr. Cunningham state we compared d
it to other cities and looked at the amount of time required to prepare.
Mr. Phillips stated in
1136.10, we specifically mentioned the requirements for the plans that must be
submitted. On page 6, we established the
process of what the DRB needs to do with applications. In 1136.11, the US Department of Interior
Guidelines was added.
Mr. Phillips stated on the
bottom of page 8, we added some guidelines.
On page 10, (f) if the DRB feels the need they can adopt other design
guidelines.
Mr. Phillips stated as far as
demolition, there have been a lot of people working on this. There is one of three possibilities that a
person can meet. One, they have to
establish that there is no historical significance. Mr. Griffin stated they ARB
just came across this earlier this year with the MacIvor building. Mr. Phillips continued to read 1136.13.
Mr. Cunningham stated, in
1136.03(c) we exclude single family residence where the continued use is single
family. If they intend to demolish it,
then the intent is for it to no longer to be used as a single family residence
so they should be subject to the ordinance.
Mr. Reams stated he feels all buildings should have to go through this
process.
Mrs. Sellers stated her
concern is with the buildings that have already been demolished in the city,
would they have been able to be demolished under this new code. Discussion held.
Mr. Phillips stated chapter
1140 should go a little faster because there were not as many changes. We took out wordiness. We changed the duties
to the DRB instead of Shade Tree. Mr.
Phillips read over other changes made.
Mr. Fogt stated he is not a
fan of street trees. There are places
that they cause a safety hazard. If you
require some places to put them in because of expansion, it could create more
of a hazard. Mr. Phillips stated there
is a code requirement for the triangle and sight distance. Mr. Fogt asked if the code allows any leeway
for common sense.
Mr. Phillips stated there is
a place in the code that allows DRB to reduce the number of trees or have them placed
if it is not feasible to place them along the street. Mr. Gore asked so we don’t have that
now. Mr. Burke stated the Shade Tree has
done it.
Mr. Phillips stated it is
also important to know that substantial expansions will not have to go before the
DRB. They will be approved by the zoning
inspector.
Mr. Phillips continues to
read through the chapter.
Mr. Reams asks if you have an
existing business and then someone builds residential next to it, where does the landscape buffer go. On the new use or existing
use? Mr. Phillips stated it would
be who ever builds last. Discussion held on who is responsible to put
in the landscaping.
Mr. Phillips continues to
read the rest of the chapter.
Mr. Phillips stated chapter
1144 does not have a lot of changes. We
did incorporate that there are certain types of people that are to be on the
board. The fact that the Planning
Commission is designated as the DRB is still up for debate.
Mr. Gore stated he would like
to ask the other council members present if they agree with his earlier
comments regarding this subject. Several
members stated they agreed.
Mr. Gore stated what he was
thinking was 3 members of Planning Commission shall serve on the DRB and City
Council shall appoint the remaining 4.
Mrs. Sellers stated she likes the “wish list” included in 1144.03 of
what types of people should be on the board.
Mr. Fogt asked Mr. Griffin if
he was comfortable with doing away with Shade Tree. Mr. Griffin stated he doesn’t have a problem
with it. Most of it is easy to follow if
they read the code. It seems to be more
of a problem to have them separate. The
design of the building and the landscaping go hand in hand.
Mr. Gore stated Mr. Phillips
is going to take the councils wishes to have the appointments divided to the
Mayor.
Mr. Phillips stated there are
also some fee changes. Mrs. Sellers
suggested having an aggregate fee for a period of one year to cover any
improvements they would want to do in that time frame. Mr. Phillips stated this is an application
fee which means it requires staff time and DRB time.
Discussion held on the
fees.
Mr. Phillips asked if it is
the general consensus that residential structures in the historic are should be
included as part of the demolition requirements. Voice affirmations heard. Then what is the fee? Mr. Reams suggested the same as the rest.
Mr. Cunningham asked Planning
Commission if there is any objection to council’s suggestion as to the makeup
of the board.
Discussion held on making
changes and when it would be able to be voted on.
ADJOURNMENT:
Mr. Seymour made a motion to
adjourn.