2003-144 Ordinance - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ordinance No. 2003-144 Page 6 selected for buildings and signs; suitability of materials and textures of materials proposed for buildings, signs and landscaping in light of surrounding developments; and protection of natural resources, such as trees, grade elevations, and waterways located in and about the development. The impact of a proposal shall be determined to be significantly adverse if, in a real sense, with respect to residential, commercial or other neighbors, or with respect to vehicular or pedestrian safety, it affects the public health, safety or welfare, or, with respect to the aesthetics of the proposal, it will have a probable negative effect upon the market value of properties sunounding it within the same zoning district. (c) Authorit,y of Commission to Change Proposal. If the Planning Commission determines that a proposal will have a significant adverse impact upon either residential, commercial or other neighbors, vehicular or pedestrian safety, or aesthetically upon the community, it shall make such changes, and only such changes, in the proposal which will, if praGticable, eliminate the significant adverse impact, and, if such a change is not practicable, then such changes which will ameliorate the adverse impact to the fullest extent practicable. (d) He&4n* -Procedure for making determinations and changes, aad Authoritv of Planning Commission to Require Expert Consultation. In making its deternunations and proposed changes pursuant to this section, the Planning Commission shall: (1) Receive complaints, comments and recommendations from the public. (2) Review the recommendations of the Architectural Review Board. (3) Refer the matter to the Forester, the Safety Departments, and any other City offcials, board, or commission, whose advice and recommendation may, in the opinion of the Commission, assist in fulfilling its duties herein. (4) Review the recommendations, reports or comments issued by the Building Official, Director of Planning or any other City official or department, particularly with regards to variances requested. (5) Determine whether the development proposal warrants the input and advice of an expert planning or traffic consultant and, if so, specifically require the applicant to either produce such a report, at its own costs, or to otherwise recommend that the City's retain such consultation services by agreement with the applicant on the terms and the costs thereof; provided, however, that a developer shall not be required to produce a planning consultant report or to pay for a planning consultant retained by the City unless it is impracticable for the otTice of the Director of Planning to provide such planning service to the Commission due to time constraints in her office, the size or complegity of the development proposal or the eapert planning services determined by the Commission to be warranted, or for other similar good cause recommended by the Director of Planning.