2022-09-21 Mike and Malissa Bernard
Charlene Way
From:Mike and Malissa Bernard <MMBERNARD1@msn.com>
Sent:Wednesday, September 21, 2022 9:03 AM
To:Robert Simison; Liz Strader; Joe Borton; Treg Bernt; Luke Cavener; Jessica Perreault;
Brad Hoaglun
Cc:Clerks Comment; Mike Bernard; pdmdiving@gmail.com; Ken Clifford
Subject:UDC Text Amendment 2022 ZOA-2022-0001 Pathways, drought tolerance landscapes
and missed opportunities to update drinking establishments, ancillary uses of
"restaurants"
External Sender - Please use caution with links or attachments.
Dear Mr. Mayor and City Councilmembers,
Thank you for your time and dedication to our city, for it is greatly appreciated by many.
I read through the UDC Text Amendment 2022 ZOA-2022-0001 and I do applaud the efforts to include Multiuse
pathways and drought tolerant landscapes to be incorporated into code. Not one public comment to date, so I will add
at least one.
One concern is the maintenance of the pathways adjacent to the roadway as in we all know just how weedy and
unkempt the road dividers can be, as in Eagle Rd., Fairview or the roundabouts; deferred and sporadic maintenance of
these safety buffers is abundantly apparent and I hope there is an increase in weed removal, trash, etc. as this reflects
on the City though this is another agency’s responsibility. There was a piece of carpet by Scentsy in the median that
stayed there for months, for example, and I would anticipate the curbs and pathways could be similarly maintained. I
would also point out that a buffer containing trees, or some other separation does give a higher percentage of
protection from a curb jumper or slick road situation to a pedestrian or cyclist, and I hope these multi-use pathways will
be attractive and just not a swath of concrete as an extension of the roadside.
I also feel there is a missed opportunity to clarify the use of the vague generic restaurant umbrella protection and
ancillary uses of entertainment or drinking establishment therein, as this use can bypass some conditions to be applied
by law and code at a City level. Anything with a stage or late hours or indoor entertainment element needs some sort of
code for the protection and quality of life of nearby residents and this is a flagrant loophole in City code that has and will
continue to be exploited. You all now have an example of that loophole that will have impacts upon a new and coming
CUP for residents of an apartment complex and existing homes nearby with late hours and a business model that does
not have any conditions of operation attached to it, as you or Planning and Zoning will never see it due to it being
deemed administrative in nature and oversight. It was not to the original DA either and the end user was not revealed
in your proceedings for subdivision.
There is and was an opportunity to do something about the parking of such establishments (drinking, nightclub, ancillary
uses, stage) and with 1 parking spot for every 250 of space is not enough. An example would be two people via car, and
that gives us the area allotted for 250 square feet of area. My living room is 16x18 (288 sf) and I can get a lot of people
in that space especially with standing room. Add a special event or draw and the whole area is overwhelmed, and
varying uses may exhaust all parking and suggested capacities and trickle into the residential areas with no oversight or
conditions attached.
Additionally, the whole nightclub code analysis and implementation of new text via this recent draft was missed this go
around and I ask you to kick this draft back to incorporate some code re. such based on your discussions and direction
for this amendment as you are not amending code frequently.
1
Thank you for everything that you do for our city and the citizens.
Sincerely,
Malissa Bernard
2