Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 3/10/2014 - Community Development Committee COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING Monday, March 10,2014 `�.. Aldermen's Conference Room, 7:00 p.m. In Attendance: Committee Members: Chairman Alderman Condon, Alderman Peterson and Alderman Santi. Absent: None. Also in Attendance: Deputy City Administrator Martin and City Clerk Jones. In Attendance: Shawn Strach, Chairman of the Planning&Zoning Commission Chairman Alderman Condon called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. She informed the members c>f the Committee that since the information exchanged between the the Planning and Zonir�.g Commission and the Community Development Committee is so similar it seemed like a good idea to have Mr. Strach attend the meeting. Public Innut Session No one signed in for Public Input Session. Discussion on Amendments to the Temuorary Use Section of The ZoninE Ordinance Deputy City Administrator Martin reiterated to the Committee that in 2010 the Committee had discussed the regulation of temporary uses. For informational purposes, he informed the Committee that in 2011, 42 temporary use permits were issued, 45 in 2012 and approximately 47 in 2013. � The current temporary use provisions in the City's Zoning Ordinance permit temporary uses of land in any zoning district by the issuance of a temporary use permit by the zoning administrator and all temporary use permits are required to be presented to the City Council for review. Deputy City Administrator Martin provided the current definition in the Zoning Ordinance for temporary uses: "A Principal or Accessory Use that is established for a period of less than one year and is discontinued within that time period." Staff is requesting consideration of the Committee to revisit this issue for the following reasons: • The overwhelming majority of temporary use permits axe approved, as part of the consent agenda and never discussed; • Many temporary use permits are annual requests and never change substantially; • There is a time delay in processing the request for temporary use permits due to the requirement each must be placed on a City Council agenda; • In an effort to continue to be more customer service/business friendly and expedite processing of applications; • Most requests/events which require a temporary use permit are submitted last minute and do not allow Staff sufficient time to place on a Council agenda. In the past, Staff has notified Council of those requests which have been administratively approved due � Community Development Committee Meeting March 10, 2014 Page 2 � to time constraints involved and situations when requests have not been placed on a Council agenda prior to an event taking place; • Many temporary use permits are issued for events which generally are normal activities conducted as part of the principal use on the property and make the requirement for a temporary use permit redundant; • If temporary uses are held in the City parks a temporary use permit for zoning purposes is not required. Typically, this is addressed by requiring a special use permit for park use; • Staff would like some administrative authority to approve certain temporary use permits, which are minor in nature; o This issue is similar in nature to allowing signs in the right-of-way for not-for- profit organizations if certain criteria are met. At the last Committee meeting, the Committee directed Staff to present amendments to the full Council, which would not require applications for signage in the right-of-way to be presented to the Council if all the criteria outlined in the Zoning Ordinance are met; • If an event is proposed which is not open to the public, Staff generally does not require a temporary use permit, but language to this effect should be included in the ordinance; and • More definitive standards/guidelines need to be established for when a temporary use permit is required to ensure consistency and equity. � Staff has researched the issue extensively. Deputy City Administrator Martin informed the Committee that there is no full proof inethod of dealing with these types of requests and inevitably they are not exclusively black and white, therefore some discretion is required but if there are standards in place the discretionary authority can be minimized. Staff believes the best way to address the regulation of temporary uses is to classify them into one of two categories, major and minor. Minor temporary uses would allow the zoning administrator, City Staff, to issue the permit administratively without specific Council authorization. Major temporary uses would require Council consideration. Staff believes temporary uses should be measured against a set of performance standards to determine whether they should be administratively approved or considered by the City Council. Staff proposes addition of the following language: "The following are excluded from the requirement of obtaining a temporary use permit: private, non-commercial events on the sponsor's property, such as homeowners' association picnics at a private park, corporate picnics on a corporate campus/property, private weddings at a private residence or private subdivision clubhouse." The following temporary use permits require consideration, review and prior approval by the � City Council if one or more of the applicable criteria are met: Community Development Committee Meeting March 10, 2014 Page 3 � Major Temporary Use: a temporary use which meets at least one of the following criteria*: Exceeds seven consecutive calendar days in length, including setup and take-down (setup and take-down includes erecting/removing tents, lighting, fencing, merchandise specifically associated with the temporary use being proposed); • Use is not permitted by right in the zoning district in which it is proposed and is not consistent with activities typically associated with the existing principal land use on the property being proposed; • Any use proposed which also involves any type of sign variance request; • Any use proposed which cannot comply with the outdoor lighting regulations or performance standards for noise as outlined in the zoning ordinance. Use is proposed on a property where the existing principal use is non-conforming use; • Use may not exceed seven consecutive calendar days but is proposed more than one time/calendar year-either on the same application or multiple applications submitted within the same calendar year; • Use proposed is not compliant with all other applicable City ordinances, rules and regulations. *The only exceptions Staff is proposing which may be considered major temporary uses in accordance with the criteria outlined above. However, Staff would like the ability to approve � administratively, without City Council consideration, the six uses already listed in the temporary use section of the Zoning Ordinance, if all applicable criteria identified are met. If one or more of these criteria cannot be met, these requests would be brought before the City Council for consideration. These include: Carnivals and Circuses, Outside Display of Landscaping Material, Sale of Christmas trees, Temporary Roadside Display and Sale of Farm Produce, Landscaping Material, or Other Related Merchandise, Downtown or Shopping Center Sidewalk Sales and Trailers for the Temporary Storage of Merchandise. Additionally, any event held in a City park would not require a temporary use permit. As previously stated these events are brought to the City Council for consideration as special use permits as park events. Minor Temporary Uses • No more than seven consecutive calendar days in length, including setup and take-down; • Use is permitted by right in the zoning district in which it's proposed; • Use is consistent with activities typically associated with the existing principal land use on the property being proposed; • Use is proposed on a property where the existing principal use is conforming; • Use is only proposed for one time/calendar year; • All applicable permits are obtained-including but not limited to any food service permit required from the McHenry County Department of Health; � Community Development Committee Meeting March 10, 2014 Page 4 � • Any temporary use previously approved by the City Council, as part of another agreement, such as: already requires trailers for new home construction. • Any use which requires a City license or permit and normally where City Council approval is not typically required, such as: peddlers adjacent to the Riverwalk, solicitors compliant with terms in the Solicitors and Peddlers ordinance, ice cream vendors, etc. Staff is requesting direction and input from the Committee regarding how to proceed with the proposed amendments and whether the Committee is recommending submission to the Planning a�id Zoning Commission for consideration at a Public Hearing. Alderman Peterson opined that it seems that breaking the criteria down into major uses and minor uses simplifies the matter. Alderman Santi inquired whether there is an appeal procedure in place for an applicant to appear before Council if Staff does not approve a request. Deputy City Administrator Martin stated that it is always an option for an applicant to appear before Council. Alderman Santi stated that he supports the changes, however, requests that Staff notify Council, via the Administrator's Report, regarding any events that are approved by Staff. Deputy City Administrator Martin assured the Committee that this would be done. � Apuroval to Schedule a Public Hearin� and Present Various Amendments to the Citv of McHenry Zoning Ordinance Re�ardinE Temporary Uses to the Planning and Zonin�Commission Motion by Peterson, seconded by Santi directing Staff to schedule a Public Hearing and present various amendments to the City of McHenry Zoning Ordinance regarding Temporary Uses to the Planning and Zoning Commission, as presented. Aye: Condon, Peterson, Santi. Nay: None. Absent: None. Motion carried. Discussion on Amendments to the Landscaping and Screenin� Section of the Zoning Ordinance Deputy City Administrator Martin informed the Committee that Ryan Schwalenberg was instrumental in compiling the information regarding the landscaping and screening provisions in the Zoning Ordinance. As part of the Community and Economic Development Department's ongoing review of City ordinances, Staff would like to revisit the requirements for landscaping and screening. The Landscaping and Screening Ordinance was last comprehensively reviewed in 2005. Several changes were made at that time including(to name a few): � Community Development Committee Meeting March 10, 2014 Page 5 � • Requiring landscaping for new signage; • Increasing parking screening strip width requirement from five feet to ten feet; and • Requiring foundation base plantings. Staff believes that with time and through the use and implementation of the ordinance, a couple of areas need to be addressed and/or evaluated, in particular,parking lot screening and screening of inechanical units. Staff would like to clarify existing language detailing what is specifically required and when. Staff provicied existing sections of the ordinance, followed by the proposed amendments and the reasoniiig behind proposing the change(s) as follows: Recommended changes to: Section VIII. Landscaping & Screening, City of McHenry Zoning Ordinance Current Code: Section VIII A. Purpose The purpose of the requirements in this section is to provide for landscaping and screening of parking and other outdoor areas that will: � 1. protect residential environments from effects of more intensive adjacent uses, 2. protect users of parking areas from excessive wind, glare, and temperature extremes, 3. reduce the adverse effects on public streets and adjacent properties of noise, blowing dust and debris, and motor vehicle headlight glare, 4. discourage unsafe access to and circulation within off-street parking areas, 5. contribute to improved community appearance and maintenance of property values, 6. promote environmental conservation, and 7. be functional with deciduous trees providing natural shading for windows in the sum�ner and evergreen trees providing year round screening and protection from the�vinter wind. Proposed Changes: Add a number"8": "Screening requirements of this section do not apply to single family residences or multi-family residences that have individual garages and driveways and parking areas with less than 10-spaces." Reasoning: This change is needed to provide clarity. As currently written, screening would need to be required for air conditioning units, swimming pool equipment, gas meters, electric meters, generators, etc. on all one and two-family dwelling unit lots, as well as at small apartment buildings.. � Communit}�Development Committee Meeting March 10, �014 Page 6 � Current Code: Section VIII 2. Parking Screening Strip A 10-foot l�lndscaped strip which shall consist of densely clustered groups of varying species and size of shrubs and trees, and berming, which may include a solid wall or fence all which shall not exeeed 4-feet in height at installation or maturity and shall not be less than 3-feet in height or rninimum as determined by the Zoning Administrator to affectively provide screening e�cept for trees which must maintain a minimum 7-foot trimmed canopy off the ground as to not obstruct views into and out of the site. This shall be located around the perimeter of the parking lot to screen vehicles and vehicle headlights from adjacent public ways. The clustering of the groups of plants shall allow for plowing and snow storage. A solid row of hedges, one type of plant or solely a solid wall shall not be permitted unless it is determined by the Zoning Administrator that this would be the only way to affectively screen vehicle headlights. The parking screening strip is required for all off-street parking lots containing more than 5 parking spaces and any vehicle or equipment storage lots or vehicle or equipment sales lots. • Insert: "All shrubs used for parking screening shall be-non-deciduous; provide year round screening and be chemical resistant." � NOTE: Chairman Alderman Condon suggested this proposed amendment be revised to read: "All shrubs used for parking screening shall be-non-deciduous; provide year round screening, be chemical resistant, and comply with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and recommendations of the City Forester." • Delete: "five-parking spaces" and insert "ten-parking spaces" • Delete: "or vehicle or equipment sales lots." Reasoning: Parking screening strips need to be effective all times of the year. Typically, landscape contractors like to use deciduous bushes (bushes that lose their leaves in the fall) such as hedge rows leaving the parking screening strips ineffective for several months out of the year. The requirement for parking screening over five parking spaces places an undue burden on property owners that have relatively small businesses and properties (i.e. offices starting at 1,400 sq. ft., restaurants 200 sq. ft. and retail stores over 1,100 sq. ft.). The screening limits the much-needed marketing visibility for smaller buildings and businesses and additional screening can have a negative impact on the property and its development/redevelopment. � Community Development Committee Meeting March 10, 2014 Page 7 � Vehicle and equipment sales lots are usually classified as automobile dealerships which require a conditional use permit. These types of businesses rely heavily on the visibility of the product however if screening is deemed appropriate for specific areas this can be addressed during the conditional use permit review/Public Hearing process and be included as a condition of approval. Current Code: 4. b. Mechanical Equipment All mechanical equipment on site shall be screened, this includes; heating, ventilation, air- conditioning, refrigeration equipment, plumbing lines, ductwork, transformers, satellite dishes, smoke exhaust fans, service entry section and similar utility panel boxes. Proposed Changes: � Insert "(larger than one meter in diameter)" following satellite dishes. • Delete"service entry section and similar utility panel boxes". • Insert "All mechanical equipment on site shall be screened from public view as follows: o Front and corner side yards. From the sidewalk across the street (if one exists) or the property line across the street at a point six- � feet above ground level. (See the attached diagram-Exhibit"A"); Chairman Alderman Condon opined there are a lot of variables regarding mechanical equipment. She stated that she has no issues with proceeding with the proposed changes, but believes enforceability may be difficult. • Interior side and rear yard. From the property line at a point six- feet above ground level. (See the attached diagram-Exhibit "A"). Reasoning: The existing zoning ordinance provides little direction as to where or how screening is to be provided. It would be cost prohibitive and unreasonable to require property owners to totally screen mechanical equipment from all directions, on all sides and at all distances. The only effective way to accomplish this would be to require parapet or mansard walls to be constructed on all sides of the building no less than the height of the equipment and in some cases higher than the equipment itself, depending upon the nearby ground elevations. The cost associated with constructing this type of screening can grow exponentially as the height of the wall increases above the rooftop. Structural modifications are often required because of the increased weight, increased wind loads and exposure and additional snow loads caused by drifting. In some cases this type of screening also has a negative impact on how effectively the ventilation and exhaust systems operate. Building height can also come into question. � Community Development Committee Meeting March 10, 2014 Page 8 � Chapter 7, Article XIII, of the Municipal Code only requires permits for parabolic or satellite dishes that are larger than one-meter in size. The proposed change would provide consistency between the Zoning Ordinance and Municipal Code. Requiring overhead service entries and panel boxes to be screened can create several life safety issues. The branches from trees and tall bushes can interfere with wires causing damage to the insulation as well as pulling down the wires if a branch falls. Screening can also interfe�re with maintenance and repair of equipment if not maintained a safe distance back from the face of the panel. Screening can also contribute to delays in disconnecting utilities in the event of an emergency. Current Co�e: Section VIII, C A. 7 A Landscape Plan shall be filed with an application for: 1. Rezoning 2. Conditional Use Permit 3. Any variance from landscaping or screening requirements 4. Integrated Design District Preliminary or Final Plan approval 5. Preliminary or Final Plat approval as provided in the Subdivision Control � Ordinance 6. And Development as defined in the Subdivision Control Ordinance 7. Building Permit or Certificate of Occupancy 8. Use Variance (MC-94-614) 9. Free-standing Monument Sign application. Proposed Change: A) Delete: "or Certificate of Occupancy"from line seven. Reasoning: Landscaping needs to be approved at time of permit to allow sufficient time for review, approval and installation. In many cases, landscaping includes features such as berms and fencing to accent plantings. Waiting to submit the plan until a certificate of occupancy is issued can sometimes result in problems achieving the required goals of the ordinance. Staff is seeking direction from the Committee how to proceed with the proposed amendments regarding submission to the Planning and Zoning Commission for consideration at a Public Hearing. Chairman Strach suggested a criterion that addresses residential areas as well as commercial areas. He indicated he supports a standard for ground equipment (complete screening) and a standard for roof equipment (50%of the height of the equipment). � Communitv Development Committee Meeting March 10, 2014 Page 9 � Chairman Alderman Condon agreed with Chairman Strach that there should be a standard. Following a brief discussion, it was determined that the proposed amendments regarding mechanical equipment would be worked on by Staff and brought back to Committee for further consideration. Auproval to Schedule a Public Hearin� and Present Various Amendments to the City of McHenry Zoning Ordinance Re�ardin�Landscaping and Screenin� to the Planning and Zoning Commission This topic will be voted on at a later date, following revisions to the section regarding screening of inechanical equipment by Staff and further consideration by the Committee. Discussion on Chicago Metropolitan A�encv for PlanninE (CMAP) Report• "Citv of McHenry Comprehensive Plan and Ordinance Assessment" and Proposal for Pursuing Completion of a Unified Develoqment Ordinance Deputy City Administrator Martin informed the Committee that over the past several years the Community Development Committee has reviewed various provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, Municipal Code and Subdivision Control and Development Ordinance and the adopted amendments to all of these Ordinances. Last year, the City of McHenry, in conjunction with the Villages of Prairie Grove and Oakwood Hills and the City of Crystal Lake, along with assistance from the Silver Creek/Sleepy Hollow Watershed Group, jointly applied for a Technical Assistance Grant from the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP), the regional planning organization for the seven collar counties in � Northeastern Illinois created by the state legislature several decades ago to complete a review and analysis of each community's comprehensive plan and development-related ordinances. The review centered on how the documents could be improved to address water quality, stormwater runoff and other areas associated with natural resource protection and enhancement. The CMAP Report suggests many different ways the City of McHenry's Comprehensive Plan and development-related Ordinances could be improved and provides model ordinance suggestions from other communities across the region. Staff believes many of the amendments are worth pursuing and others which may be desirable, but due to practical or other reasons, perhaps should not be adopted. Staff is suggesting the undertaking of a unified development Ordinance, which is simply one ordinance created by merging the Zoning, Subdivision Control and Development and Stormwater Ordinance, as well as all other land development regulations, some of which are in the City's Municipal Code, into one cohesive document. Staff believes this is an appropriate time to pursue this significant undertaking for the following reasons: • Provides Staff, Community Development Committee, Council and Planning and Zoning Commission an opportunity to review long-term goals and issues, which need to be addressed moving forward, as they relate to land development; � Communii:y Development Committee Meeting March 10, 2014 Page 10 �-- • McHenry County is currently rewriting their entire stormwater Ordinance, which will be adopted by October 2014, which the City will be required to adopt upon its completion; � The zoning ordinance currently utilized by the City was adopted in 1986 but has been updated several times since, however each time any ordinance is updated there is an increasing risk of contradicting existing provisions and/or adopting redundant regulations; • The City's subdivision control and development ordinance was adopted but not comprehensively reviewed and/or updated since its adoption in 2004; • The issue of variance requests and how they are dealt with, in terms of public notice requirements, etc. is different dependent upon from which ordinance the variance is being sought; • One unified ordinance would certainly be more user-friendly; • Many of the amendments proposed in the CMAP Report could be incorporated into a new ordinance of this type; • Development right now is slow and is anticipated to remain slow for the foreseeable future and most likely the rate of growth and development seen between 2003 and 2006 will not be duplicated for many years if ever. Typically, many communities hire a consultant to undertake a project of this magnitude however the cost for this could range anywhere from $150-200,000. Staff believes this can be done without hiring a consultant with the understanding there would be additional attorney �"' fees and engineering fees involved durin the rocess. Staff is g p proposing an atypical approach which would save the City a lot of money, as opposed to bringing in a consultant to do the work. In staffs opinion, consultants are certainly valuable but ultimately, an ordinance such as the one being proposed has to focus on the specific goals, preferences and desires of the individual community the ordinance is being written for. Further, even if a consultant was hired, there would still be significant staff and Committee time required to review everything put together by the consultant. In this instance, and not to oversimplify the matter, staff is recommending eliminating the "middle man". Staff has researched Unified Development Ordinances extensively and believes the City could essentially model its ordinance around a unified development ordinance(s) done by other communities. Staff provided several examples of tables of contents taken directly from unified development ordinances from McHenry County, as well as other areas around the country. It should be noted that many of the amendments previously mentioned at the beginning of this supplement, which the Committee, Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council have already updated could be incorporated into a new ordinance of this type. Additionally, Staff would recommend eliminating all stormwater-related regulations the City has currently, in its Municipal Code and Subdivision Control and Development Ordinance, and incorporate the new countywide ordinance. The City is required to adopt the countywide stormwater �. ordinance as a minimum standard and since the City really hasn't recently amended its Communit}�Development Committee Meeting March 10, 7,014 Page 11 `- stormwater regulations the new countywide ordinance will include all the best practices for stormwater management. Major Chapters in Proposed Unified Development Ordinance• Initially, at a minimum, Staff is proposing including the following chapters as part of this one document. Currently, these regulations are in either the municipal code, zoning ordinance or the subdivi�,ion control and development ordinance: • General Provisions; • Definitions; • Use Districts; � General Development Standards (signs, parking, landscaping and screening, lighting and fences); • Subdivision and Site Plan Standards (infrastructure, roadways, water, wastewater, electric, gas, land disturbance activities-stripping, clearing, grading, etc.); • Natural Resource Protection (tree preservation, floodplain, wetland, floodplain, stormwater management, riparian buffers, erosion and sedimentation control, conservation design, etc.); • Administration and Enforcement; �-' • Nonconformities. • Review existing ordinances,plans mission, vision and long-term strategies; Proposed Process of Developing Unified Development Ordinance (Seven Step Process) As previously stated the development of this type of ordinance is not a simple task and will require a large time investment by the Committee. Staff is proposing the following process, which includes seven steps to accomplish this task. These can certainly be amended, combined and/or modified in any way after further discussion and consideration by the Committee. � Formulate timeline for ordinance development including specific benchmarks at different intervals to ensure adequate progress is being made. This will also be critical in completion of Step Four and should include a tentative meeting schedule over the next several months to ensure momentum is not lost. T'his will entail additional meetings than those already adopted by the Committee at the beginning of this year (Step One); • Review goals and major areas of concern to address-what do you like/dislike about current ordinances and what are the primary issues a new ordinance should address/include in order to be effective, be user-friendly or assist in achieving the long-term vision and goals of the City? � Community Development Committee Meeting March 10, �014 Page 12 �-- • This ordinance will be the regulatory tool utilized in pursuing the goals and objectives included in the City's comprehensive plan and should be consistent with what is included in that plan, and it will be crucial to develop strategies to address concerns and meet the goals-how will the new ordinance accomplish this? (Step Two); • Frame a citizen participation and engagement element identifying at what points public input would be advantageous, for periodic review of the ordinance and draft ordinance once it's finished, including what citizen participation techniques to utilize, i.e.: surveys (mail/on-line through a service like `Survey Monkey'), press release, social media, focus groups, open house, etc. This should also include a joint-meeting with all the members of the Planning and Zoning Commission,prior to an official Public Hearing being held on the entire draft ordinance. This will assist in ensuring the Planning and Zoning Commission is comfortable and has no major concerns prior to holding a Public Hearing. The best and most effective way to ensure a process such as this is smooth, minimizes opposition, addresses concerns of all who will be utilizing the document, as well as special interest groups, is not overly burdensome, is user-friendly, includes all appropriate language and accomplishes the long-term goals of the community, and more importantly, perceived by � the general public as a completely transparent process is to continually educate and keep informed, involve and encourage active participation at multiple points throughout the process from all parties (stakeholders) impacted. It would not be advantageous at all to go through this process in a vacuum, complete the entire document and then initiate some form of public participation. (At this point staff would recommend consulting with the City attorney to ensure all legal requirements are met with regards to process, public participation, legal notifications and compliance with State of Illinois statutes-specifically regarding zoning and subdivision, enabling legislation which would govern the development of this type of ordinance (Step Three); • Write, review and receive comments, concerns, questions, etc. following the completion of each chapter (Involvement and professional consultation with the City engineer will be required, specifically when the chapters outlining subdivision, site planning standards and natural resource-related ordinance development are written to ensure the most up-to-date best engineering practices are incorporated) (Step Four); • Review and solicit feedback and comments following completion of entire draft ordinance and submit to City attorney for comprehensive legal review (this could also be done on an individual chapter basis, however, staffs concern with that would be the City attorney would ultimately have to review `-- the entire document as a whole upon completion to analyze the relationship Community Development Committee Meeting March 10, 2014 Page 13 �-- and identify potential problems, conflicts, contradictions which may exist in multiple chapters ) (Step Five); • Hold Public Hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission (Step Six); • Consideration and adoption of completed ordinance by City Council (Step Seven). If the Committee believes this is a worthwhile project, at the March 10 meeting it is Staffs intention to discuss the establishment of an Ad Hoc Committee to oversee the completion of this project. Staff believes it would be advantageous if the Ad Hoc Committee consisted of a combination of the following members: • three members of the Community Development Committee; • two members of the Planning and Zoning Commission; and • one or two Staff inembers; and • two to three additional public participants (such as, developer/builders, architects, environmental leaders, realtors, general member of the public with no professionally- related affiliation(i.e. average homeowner), etc. `' Ideally, the Ad Hoc Committee would consist of no more than 8-9 members and be diverse, representing multiple interests. Staff can provide specific suggestions of potential individuals to consider. A conversation ensued regarding specific individuals, and their respective positions, who might be candidates for the Ad Hoc Committee. Deputy City Administrator Martin informed the Committee that it cannot be overstated, this will be a significant undertaking for the Committee and require a greater time commitment than originally anticipated when the Committee schedule was adopted for 2014. Deputy City Administrator Martin opined that it may take as much as an additional one to two meetings per month. Staff believes; however, for the reasons previously stated and given the effectiveness and accomplishments of the Committee over the past several years, it is something that can certainly be accomplished. Staff is not proposing to hire a consultant however Deputy City Administrator Martin noted that there would be some outside consulting expenditures necessary to complete the project, primarily for legal and engineering review. It is Staffs intent to do the majority of the ordinance research and writing in-house, with the hope of potentially applying for a CMAP Technical Assistance Grant to help with the public participation/citizen engagement portion of the project. Staff is seeking input, consensus and direction from the Committee on the proposal outlined in this supplement of pursuing completion of a unified development ordinance, as well as the 4 initial outline of what would be included in this proposed ordinance and generally the process Community Development Committee Meeting March 10, 2014 Page 14 `— outlined in order to accomplish this goal in a timely and efficient manner. Chairman Alderman Condon stated she was initially concerned that such a big undertaking would overburden Deputy City Administrator Martin, but she has reconsidered and supports the idea regarding the project and an Ad Hoc Committee. Chairman Alderman Condon stated that she is in favor of the idea of having a civil engineer, a realtor and a developer on the Ad Hoc Committee. Alderman F'eterson opined that a Unified Development Ordinance would prepare the City for the future. However, he expressed some concerns that members of the public might have their own agendas. Responding to inquiries from Alderman Santi regarding a completion date and who would be using the Ordinance, Deputy City Administrator Martin stated that it likely will take one to two years to complete the project entirely. He noted that everyone using the current ordinances would use the Unified Ordinance. Discussion ensued. Chairman Alderman Condon stated that the next meeting of the Community Development Committee is on May 12, 2014. She suggested that between now and then Deputy City Administrator Martin would have an opportunity to assemble an itinerary for the Committee's review. Deputy City Administrator Martin stated he was hoping to have the first meeting of the Ad Hoc Committee in April. Discussion took place `, regarding a potential first meeting of the Ad Hoc Committee. Discussion ensued regarding scheduling conflicts. Chairman Alderman Condon suggested a brief ineeting of the Community Development Committee on April 21, 2014 at 6:30 pm, prior to the Council meeting. She stated that by having a meeting on that date, the Ad Hoc Committee could potentially schedule its first meeting on Apri128, 2014 to appoint committee members. Motion by Santi, seconded by Peterson directing Staff, following conversations with the City Administrator and the Mayor, to formulate an Ad Hoc Committee, together with an agenda and a list of potential members for the Ad Hoc Committee Aye: Condon, Peterson, Santi. Nay: None. Absent: None. Motion carried. Next Meeting Date Chairman Alderman Condon informed the members of the committee that the next meeting of the Community Development Committee will be on Monday, May 12, 2014, at 7:00 pm in the Alderman's Conference Room. Other Business Deputy City Administrator Martin, responding to an inquiry from Alderman Santi regarding whether tattoo parlors are going to be established as a separate zoning district, stated that it �" would be Staff's preference that the status quo remain as it is. Community Development Committee Meeting March 10, 2014 Page 15 � Alderman Santi inquired about the status of reconstruction, following the fire at Foxhole Pizza. Deputy City Administrator Martin stated that it is taking the property owner longer than originally determined to settle matters with the insurance company. However, he has been informed that tenants in the building will be back on premises prior to the restaurant opening again. Adiournment Motion by Santi, seconded by Peterson to adjourn the meeting at 9:32 p.m. Aye: Condon, Peterson, Santi. Nay: None. Absent: None. Motion carried. Respectfully submitted, -;�� Geri Condo , Chairman � �