A) CALL TO ORDER.

The meeting was called to order by Chairman Kusina, at 6:00 p.m. Members present: Bennett, Kusina, Fels, Sitzma, Hodgson, & Campbell.

Members absent: Dobulis, Whitney & Flanders.

Staff present: Harsh.

B) INQUIRY INTO POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.

None noted.

C) APPROVAL OF AGENDA.

Chairman Kusina stated this is a one-issue meeting as a Special Meeting, so there will be no minutes, new business, or any other agenda items.

Motion by Hodgson, supported by Bennett, to approve the agenda. Motion carried.

D) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF September 8, 2003.

Minutes of the September 8, 2003 will be reviewed at the next Planning Commission Meeting.

E) PUBLIC HEARINGS.

None.

F) NEW BUSINESS.

None.

Motion carried.

G) OLD BUSINESS.

1. Continued discussion of the “Assisted Living” amendment.

Mr. Harsh stated the Council had a Public Hearing on this item and passed a motion sending it back to the Planning Commission to address primarily four issues. These are listed on the Memo of September 17 which the Commission received in their packet. Memo from Harsh on September 22, stated that the City Attorney had determined that the Planning Commission would not have to hold another Public Meeting, unless they decided to recommend approval of Section 5.32 (9) (g) (K). He stated this wording would violate the requirements of the enabling act, requiring regulations be uniform over an entire district. He suggested if the Planners wanted to set limitations as proposed in this Section, they would need to develop an overlay district.

The Planning Commission agreed it would not make sense to have an overlay, when the land that this would pertain to is such a small number.

On the revised draft of 9/22/03. Mr. Harsh stated page one needs no changes. Page 2, Item (g), wording shall be added that says the City Council has the final approval of the
Special Use Permit for this type of use.

Page 2, Item (g) (H), is changed to read, the maximum building roof height shall not exceed twenty six (26) feet, and the building shall be reflective of the other residential structures in the immediate area

Page 3, Item K is not needed, and will be deleted from the draft.

Also questioned by Council is the reason for the difference between a one and two bedroom assisted living unit being only (50) fifty square feet.

Harsh stated he might have miscalculated this figure.

After a brief discussion, it was decided that it need not be that high as a minimum.

Campbell moved, supported by Bennett, to change this requirement for a two-bedroom unit to a minimum of 620 s.f. Motion carried.

H) PUBLIC INPUT, NOT RELATED TO OTHER AGENDA ITEMS.

I) FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS.

J) ADJOURNMENT.

There being no further business to discuss, Fels moved, supported by Bennett, to adjourn. Motion carried.

Respectfully Submitted,

Barbara A. Fels
Secretary