06/14/2006 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

VI, COAINIUNICATIONS: Ord°anance 2006-122 An ordinance amending section 1139.01 of the Zoning Code in order to eliminate the location and density requirements for pet stores and animal hospitals in General Retail Business I)istricts. Ms. Wenger believed that the code was written so that residents would not be impacted by animal sounds or odars. She feels the 700 foot regulation is overly restrictive to traditional pet stor%set supply store operations. Although the Zoning Advisory Committee is updating the code, there is a business currently intending on locating in the City, which must receive a variance from the BZA due to this restriction. The proposed legislation better defines what a pet shop is and is Just the start to updating the entire section of the code. 5he would recommend that wording be included into the legislation which would require activities be confined within wholly enclosed build'uags (i.e. no earternal dag runs). Mr. Conway advised that he agreed with Ms. Wenger. Mr. O'IVIa11ey advised that he was also in agreement with the recommended changes and felt that animal hospital and pet sfiore warding should be separated and each more clearly defined. M. Mahoney moved to recomnaend the adoptian of ordinance 2006-122 watb the recommendation that the legislation be amended to include language to require activiities be confwed to wholly enclosed buildings. G. ,Malone seconded the motion, vvhich was unanimously approved. Ordfnance 2006-130 An ordinance amending section 1126.09 of the Zoning Code in order to change the procedure for reviewing proposed minor changes to approved development proposals. 1VIs. Wenger advised tha.t in 2004 section 1126.09 was amended to include specific submittal requirements and pre submittal conferences. However the minor change section of the chapter was not addressed. Since tb.e Planning Commission and ARB consolidation there are now 2 chairrrban rather than 3 and the input of the Planning Department. When she first sta.rted working with Councilman Gareau on the legislation she thought the easiest way to update the section was to just substiiute tb:e ARB and PC references and inserting Planning & Design Commission Chair, BZD Chair and Planning Director. However both the Law and Building Departments have raased the question as to whether or nmt she should be involved in the approval or denial and whether or not the Planning Department should handle minor changes in Iieu of the Building Deparhnent. During a recent staff meeting they discussed a procedure where applications woaild be submitted to the Building Department for zoning review, as they are novv. `I'hose proposals meeting a11 zoning code requirements would be forwazded to the Planning Director who would determine whether or not the request was in fact a minor change. It would also allow the Planning Director an opportunity to have intera.ction with the applicants to rnake recoffimendations to ffiake the request more acceptable as a minor change. Only then woiald a minor change be submitted to the chairs for minor change approval. In the past chairman were given a week to submit an approval or rejection or the city would consider the request approved. She would rather assume requests are rejected unless something is received from the chairs. Although what 3