A) CALL TO ORDER.

The meeting was called to order by Vice-Chairman Hodgson, at 6:00 p.m. Members present: Bennett, Fels, Sitzema, Hodgson, Campbell, Dobulis, and Flanders.

Members absent: Kusina, and Whitney.

Staff present: Harsh, and Manore.

B) INQUIRY INTO POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.

None noted.

C) APPROVAL OF AGENDA.

Dobulis moved, supported by Bennett, to approve the agenda, as printed. Motion carried.

D) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF September 8, 2003, and September 22, 2003.

Campbell moved, supported by Sitzema, to approve the Minutes of the September 8, 2003, and September 22, 2003, as presented. Motion carried.

E) PUBLIC HEARINGS.

1) Public Hearing for Development Plan #03-26DP - Family Video - 1402 Bridge Street.

Tammy Van Sumeren, Family Video, was present to answer any questions. Zoning Administrator Diane Manore stated the applicant is meeting all of the requirements of the zoning ordinance, needing no variances. There is being proposed a "food center" at the east end of the building, and there will be 54 parking spaces, including handicapped, with one curb cut off of Bridge Street.

Public Comment was invited, but none was given.

Motion made by Bennett, supported by Flanders, to approve Development Plan #03-26DP - Family Video - 1402 Bridge Street. Motion carried.

F) NEW BUSINESS.

1) Correspondence from Richard Shapack - Marine Commercial Development.

The Planning Commission received in its packet a letter from Richard Shapack concerning the Marine Commercial Development District on the south shore of Round Lake. Richard Shapack, an attorney representing Mr. & Mrs. Ronald Hughes, who have a home at 219 Belvedere Avenue, was present to explain their request. He stated that his firm has been hired to represent their interest in preventing irreparable damage and additionally, in remedying the outdated zoning arrangements currently in place in the City. He stated they are looking for a standard way of measuring from waterline of properties, at an average of the setback from waterline on both sides of a building. He stated that when Mr. & Mrs. Hughes built their home, they were considerate of the neighbors, leaving them a view corridor. He stated the Planning Commission asked them to meet with the neighbors and that is what they did.

Campbell asked the Planner if we have any records on the agreement Mr. Shapack is speaking about.

Mr. Harsh stated they would have to research the matter to see what was actually said or done.

Campbell asked if we have anything before us to actually talk about.

Mr. Shapack stated he felt they were trying to prevent problems before they happen, not only for the Hughes family, but other properties on the waterfront.

Flanders stated he felt that if Mr. Wachler bought the property all the way to the waters edge thinking he could utilize all of it, and then we hurry up and change the ordinance, would not be fair to him.

Mr. Hughes stated this is why they are coming in now, before any proposals are made, so that the City can put in some wording on negative impacts.

Campbell stated we already have wording in the ordinance on negative impacts.

Mr. Shapack stated he does not feel they are specific enough to prevent negative impacts on neighbors. He stated he feels that requiring averaging setbacks from the waterline would be fairer to the neighbors.

Dobulis asked if the record would show it was the Planning Commission that asked Mr. Hughes to get the approval of the neighbors.

Harsh stated he would not know until he checks.

Shapack asked if the Planning Commission would like him to present maps, etc., to show what could happen under the existing ordinance.

It was the consensus that it would be a good thing, as we have nothing to look at right now.

Dobulis stated he would like the map to show how many other parcels on the lake could be affected.

Scott Beatty, local attorney, was present to support the idea of looking at some changes in the ordinance to reflect the changing uses on the south shore of Round Lake. He agreed that averaging for residential properties would be a good way to go.

Campbell stated he would like the map to be presented to us show properties to the west, as well as others along the shoreline that is existing, as well as what could happen under the existing wording.

It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that they would look at this issue again, when the attorneys come back with the needed information.

G) OLD BUSINESS.

1. Amendment regarding Assisted Living.

Mr. Harsh stated that at a previous meeting, the Planning Commission had been advised by Bryan Graham, that we would not need another public hearing on this matter, unless we were suggesting an overlay district. As the Planning Commission did not see the need for this, they sent their recommendation back to Council. Following that action, Jim Young, City Attorney, recommended that the Planning Commission does need to hold an additional meeting, so it is back to this Commission to set a public hearing on the amendment.

After a brief discussion on the amendment, Fels moved, supported by Flanders, to hold a public hearing on the assisted living amendment. Motion Carried.

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

None.

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