Laserfiche WebLink
The City Council would have a number of options regarding the proposed amendment. <br />First, the Council could adopt the amendment proposed in the staff report, which is <br />based on the applicant's original submissions. The Council could take up the <br />consideration of other uses under a separate study, or consider them as the applicant <br />brings new proposals forward. Second, the Council could expand the list by adding a <br />clause such as "Retail Sales of home improvement goods and services ". This would <br />require some occasional interpretation on the part of staff, with occasional informal <br />requests to the City Council for direction, depending on the applicant's proposed tenant. <br />Third, the City could consider a much broader district, including the uses proposed by <br />the applicant, or a different district altogether. This would result in the creation of a new <br />zoning designation, and may suggest that the area would be transitioning to a more <br />intensive retail district that previously considered. <br />The Planning Commission directed City staff to review the newly submitted material and <br />forward the applicant's request to the City Council. <br />Summary and Recommendation <br />As noted above, there appear to be four primary options. These are as follows: <br />(1) Adopt the amendment proposed in the staff report dated April 9, 2007. <br />(2) Adopt the amendment proposed, with the addition of a clause that includes <br />"Retail Sales of Home Improvement Goods and Services ". <br />(3) Adopt the amendment, with the addition of the list proposed by the applicants. <br />(4) Rezone the property to a different district that includes the uses proposed by <br />the applicant, such as B -3, General Business. <br />Planning staff is concerned that the list proposed by the applicant is overly broad, given <br />the land use guidance for this area that in the past has been more weighted toward <br />warehousing with limited retail use. As such, planning staff would recommend Options <br />1 or 2. Option 2 broadens the district by relying on staff interpretation of a use proposed <br />by the owner of the property. It would be expected that occasionally, staff would bring a <br />particular use forward to the City Council for a determination as to whether a proposed <br />use fits the description. <br />Options 3 and 4 result in a much more intensive retail district. If this is the intent of the <br />City Council, it may be appropriate to consider one of these options, with direction in the <br />Comprehensive Plan update to reconsider the land use direction of the area. <br />Pc: Kathy Glanzer <br />Steve Westerhaus <br />Lee Elfering <br />