The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2012-11-06 PZC MINUTES• • • , Pl annin g an d Zonin g Co mmi ss ion Study S ess ion C ase #2012 -07 PUD Am e ndme nts to th e UDC ove mbe r 6 , 2012 P age I of 4 CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 6, 2012 Minutes and audio are available at: http://www.englew oo d gov .erg/Index .as px ?page=l 52 I. CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commiss ion was called to order at 7:00 p .m. in the Commun ity Room of the Englewood Civic Center, Chair Brick presiding. Present: Abs ent: St aff: ~ Bleile, Roth, We lk er, Knoth (e nte re d a t 7:10 pm ), Fish , Brick, Kinton , Freemir e (alternate ) King, Townley (Excused ) Alan White, Communi t y Development Director Tricia La ngon, Senior Planner Nancy Reid , Assistant City Attorney II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES October 16, 2012 Fish moved: Kinton seconded: TO APPROVE THE OCTOBER 16, 2012 MINUTES Chair Brick asked if there were any modifications or corrections. There were non e. AYES: NAYS : ABSTA IN: ABSENT: Roth , We lker, Fish , Brick, Kinton None Bleile King, Knoth, Townley Motion carried . Chair Brick reminded the Comm ission to refrain from side conversations during the meetin g. • • Plannin g and Zonin g Commission Study Session Case #2012-07 PUD Amendments to the UDC No ve mber 6 , 2012 P ag e 2 of 4 Ill. STUDY SESSION PUD AMENDMENTS TO THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE Director White stated the PUD Amendments are being brought forward at this time due to several requests in the past few months and comments made at the end of the last PUD request public hearing that led Staff to believe there is additional information that the Planning Commission members wanted to see or that the City's process was not quite what the Commission perceived it should be in order to make an informed recommendation. The Commission asked him to speak to City Council and report back. Director White reported PUD Amendments and Distilleries and Nano-breweries are priorities to City Council. Director White noted Staff put together what the current PUD City regulations are and what was in the development code prior to the Unified Development Code being adopted in 2004. The recommended course of action is to go back to the regulations in place before the Unified Development Code was adopted and institute a two-step PUD approval process. ~ If the applicant is ready with a specific development proposal and plan they can combine the district plan and the site plan process at the same time and go through the Planning and Zoning and City Council public hearing process and get both pieces approved at the same time. ~ If the applicant is onl y looking for entitlements, they would go through the district plan process and whenever they are ready for development they would come back with a site plan and go through that approval process. Mr. Freemire exited the meeting at 7:20. The Commission discussed what was in the code prior to 2004. Discussion points included: • After the UDC was rewritten in 2004 there was to be a Phase II, which included the PUD. Several parts of Phase II have been completed such as signage and landscaping. • Several options were presented. • Need to come up with a procedural method of working with Planned Unit Developments, defining the details and the issues. • Old code allowed for concurrent submittal of the district plan and the site plan, which caused problems. • Instituting a Use Variance for certain types of issues was discussed. • Staff is looking for a feel from the Commission as to what y ou would like to • see. • • • , Pl anning and Zoning Commission Study Session Case #2012-07 PUD Am endm ent s to the UDC November 6, 2012 Pa ge 3 of 4 • Commission has issues with grantin g a PUD with very little detail. Suggest requesting minimum re quirements for each app lication : district and site, which would be provided to the applicant at the pre-application meeting. • The Commission recommends approval of the district plan to City Council, but recommends City Council require a site plan to be reviewed by th e Planning and Zoning Commission. • The proposed regulations give the applicant a short cut if they have all the details worked out at t he time they submit. • More detail needed at a future study session. • Commission requested an organized list to show what is needed for each submittal. • Discussed how to obtain more inform ation than is provided in order to mak e a decision . Ms. Reid will look into the issue and report back at a future date. • It was suggested a study session be held on how to read p lans to ass ist th e members who are not builders or architects. The PUD discussion will continue at a later date. IV. PUBLIC FORUM There was no public present. !!] V. A TIORNEY'S CHOICE Ms . Reid had nothing further to report. VI. STAFF'S CHOICE Director White and Ms. Langon provided a tentative schedule for future meetings. November 20: December 4: December 18: Public Hearing, Sandcreek and W H PUD Rezoning Holiday dinner 2012 Work Program Review 2013 Work Program Prioritization To be determined Amendments to the Flood Plain Regulations w ill need to be addressed in early 2013 due to changes in the State requirements. Chair Brick asked Mr. Knoth if he would lik e to discuss his ideas regarding development at th e December 4 th meeting. Mr. Knoth said he would. Staff will add the topic to the agenda . Ms. Langon noted she will not be available to attend the December 4 th meeting . • • • Planning and Zonin g Commission Study Sess ion Case #20 12-07 PUD Amendme nt s to the UDC November 6, 2012 Page 4 of 4 [l] VII. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE The Commiss io n e r's had noth in g f u rther to repo rt. The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p .m. ~~