My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-14-2024 Planning Commission Minutes
>
Minutes
>
2020-2029
>
2024
>
11-14-2024 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/22/2026 8:40:25 PM
Creation date
6/22/2026 8:39:37 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />NOVEMBER 14, 2024 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />6 <br />Commissioner Masrud asked for more information on the reasoning why I-2 is not an allowed <br />district. <br /> <br />The Community Development Director commented that is partially because of the location of the <br />I-2 district, noting that some of the land is close to residential property which could create a <br />nuisance. He provided additional information on I-1 as well. <br /> <br />Chair Johnson suggested including a point in the scoring for Little Canada residents, noting that <br />she would prefer to give favor to someone who lives and owns a business in the community. <br /> <br />Commissioner Owens asked if there is any additional consideration for BIPOC or women-owned <br />businesses. <br /> <br />The Community Development Director confirmed that the State does have equity measures for <br />BIPOC, and women-owned businesses and therefore he would be hesitant to add another layer <br />within the City regulations. <br /> <br />Commissioner Lum asked if other cities are using the scoring system. <br /> <br />The Community Development Director replied that many cities do not have that scoring system <br />and are taking applications first come, first serve. He stated that most likely the City would <br />follow the first come, first serve process as well but the scoring system would allow the City to <br />consider a second application if received in the eight-day window. He provided more details on <br />the eight-day window. He stated that if the State has licensed people, an application could be <br />considered as early as January 1st. He noted that the OCM has stated that they are behind and <br />therefore it could take longer for someone to secure their license from the State, as that is <br />required prior to applying within a community. <br /> <br />Chair Johnson asked if there are standards that the State has put out for the security of a retail <br />location. <br /> <br />The Community Development Director commented that there are some standards put in place by <br />the State, but the issue of security is less clear. He stated that the City is requiring a security plan <br />to be submitted, along with a ventilation plan. <br /> <br />Commissioner Masrud asked if the City would then advertise that an application has been <br />received to make people aware of the eight-day window. <br /> <br />The Community Development Director confirmed that the City would advertise that information <br />on its website. <br /> <br />Commissioner Masrud suggested that the eight-day window be increased to 15 days to provide <br />the most opportunity for competition without impacting the 30-day review window.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.