Laserfiche WebLink
2 <br />Earlier this year at a meeting of the City Council, many people from the community expressed their concern <br />that, due to a drafting error in the 2016 zoning-code revisions, the maximum allowable height for buildings in <br />the Professional Office district was not clear. The intent of the zoning-code revisions was never to change the <br />pre-existing height limitations, which was 30-ft. It was 30-ft before and clearly, based on the FAQ that was <br />produced by City Staff at the time, still to this day available on the City website, says very clearly <br /> <br /> Q: What are the development standards for the P-district? <br /> A: New development in the Professional Office P-zoning district is limited to 30-ft in height. <br /> <br />Now, to their credit, the City Council recognized the significance of this issue to the community and they <br />directed City Staff to correct the zoning code to leave no doubt as to the maximum permissible height of <br />structures in the P-zoning district. <br /> <br />I want to specifically thank Mayor Cutter and council members Cox, Lopez and Ballew for hearing our <br />concerns and taking action. <br /> <br />Now that City Staff has come back with the required revisions, I rise tonight in support of Staff's proposal to <br />clarify the maximum allowable height in the P-district at 30-ft. <br /> <br />I hope this is not controversial, that the Planning Commission will overwhelmingly support this correction for <br />an error, and set the original intent in place. Please vote in support of City Staff's recommendation. <br /> <br />================================================== <br /> <br />48:30 Richard Brennan (nearly inaudible on the recording) <br />Can Staff confirm, was the representation just given correct, was this originally 30-ft, was it changed to 50-ft <br />and was that fully vetted at the time? <br /> <br />48:50 Andrew Mogensen's response to Brennan's question <br />So there's some background in your Staff report on this. When we were working on the 2016 General Plan <br />update and Zoning Code update, Staff had initially recommended eliminating the P-zone. We recommended it <br />be one of the outer downtown area zones. I can't remember off the top of my head, I think it was DA-2. <br /> <br />The Planning Commission considered this. And it was, I believe, your recommendation to, if I'm not mistaken, <br />at the time, to maintain the P-zone. It was ultimately Council's decision to not get rid of the P-zone and make it <br />a different zone. <br /> <br />So, being a few years ago there were clearly different people involved. I was new to the City at the time and I <br />wasn't as involved with that code update, but Staff had initially recommended this be on of the DA-zones. That <br />didn't happen. So that's one of the reasons why this condition exists today. <br /> <br />[This is a non-answer as it does not address the question. Nothing about the Council's original intent of 30-ft. <br />Nothing about the lack of vetting. Nothing about the error. Nothing about the Council directing staff to fix the <br />error. This situation does not exist because Staff originally wanted P to be changed to DA-2, it exists because of <br />a clerical error.] <br /> <br /> Evan <br />