My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Minutes 2020 01 09
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2020 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Minutes 2020 01 09
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/9/2020 8:11:14 AM
Creation date
7/9/2020 8:06:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
1/9/2020
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />January 9t", 2020 <br />Page 5 of 7 <br />Zuccaro replied that staff would have to consult with the City Attorney's office to <br />determine the right way to address enforcement in each situation. Options included <br />addressing it under storage of construction material, dust, or grading and drainage. <br />Howe stated that he thought it would be worth a discussion to update the PUD Code <br />and to attend to the process for expired PUDs. General agreement. <br />Ritchie noted that there were currently no special criteria for extensions, but there could <br />be. <br />Diehl asked where those regulations would live. <br />Ritchie replied that they would live in the Code. <br />Williams noted that there was a discussion on the extension of PUDs and construction <br />staging and asked if both of them were in the Code. <br />Zuccaro confirmed and noted that part of the discussion could be about how and where <br />to address these issues. For example, some of these issues happen on non-PUD <br />properties. He noted that these issues might not be easy to enforce, but the City's ability <br />to do so could be improved. <br />Williams asked if the City had recourse to put liens on properties. <br />Zuccaro replied that the City could place a lien if a property owner did not pay for <br />abatement costs. <br />Rice noted that there were other recourses that were not often invoked. <br />Williams asked if there were other committees that the Planning Commission should <br />meet with and if the Commission should meet with Council more often. <br />Zuccaro replied that the Old Town Overlay revision could involve a joint meeting with <br />the Historic Preservation Commission. <br />Brauneis noted that they used to have liaisons, but there wasn't a lot of live discussion. <br />He thought that there were specific cases where it was appropriate to hear from other <br />committees. He thought the Sustainability Advisory Board was one example, but that it <br />would be more of a project -specific, case -by -case basis. <br />Williams thought that there would be some overlap with other committees on the Open <br />Space items. <br />Ritchie replied that the Commission's role was to look at applications on Open Space <br />property versus looking at policy. <br />Ritchie finished her presentation by updating the Commission on the status of the <br />Strategic Planning Framework. <br />7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.