Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />December 1211, 2019 <br />Page 10 of 13 <br />Zuccaro replied that when someone was doing grading they usually have to get a storm <br />water permit and reseed the dirt to avoid erosion issues. The City could require that the <br />applicant reseed the dirt pile as a way of addressing the erosion issues or a nuisance <br />dust issue. <br />Williams noted that the situation was the same as with the Foundry where there is a <br />large dirt pile. She noted that when the Commission had approved the PUD <br />Amendment for the Foundry without conditions to remove the dirt pile. <br />Zuccaro replied that that an enforcement issues is not typically addressed through PUD <br />extension. The time limit on the extension was to provide the opportunity to reevaluate if <br />there were community changes or policies that might change in the near future. <br />Asper noted that the single acre of property covered four streets and affected every <br />single person in the neighborhood every single day. <br />Bruce Bernhardt, 1079 Leonard Lane, stated that the eyesore was more than just the <br />dirt. He noted that there was a corrugated shed currently on Canyon Street and an old <br />yellow bus or carriage that kids played in and that that could be removed from that lot. <br />He agreed with his fellow neighbors that there should be a landscaping barrier. <br />Elizabeth Lay Evans with the Boon LLC, which was part of the ownership of this <br />property and own adjacent property. She stated that she understood the neighbors' <br />concerns, but the easiest way to remedy the situation was to grant the extension. She <br />stated that if the timeframe was shortened, that was reasonable, but the intent was to <br />move quickly now that the management issues had been resolved. <br />Howe asked staff for an estimate on a reasonable timeline. <br />Zuccaro stated that there were two phases, the apartments and the live/work. He <br />thought the intent was to build the apartments first. He thought the construction timeline <br />would be 1-2 years, but it could be 1-2 years for each. <br />Rice asked if there had been an application for a building permit. <br />Zuccaro replied that there had not. <br />Williams asked if the extension meant that they had three years to pull any building <br />permits. <br />Zuccaro stated that if there was a one-year extension and the live/work units were not <br />built in that timeframe they would require another extension. <br />Brauneis asked for closing statements. <br />David stated that he understood the frustration with the eyesores and that they would <br />address it and make sure it was clean. He anticipated that the project would get built <br />sooner than later with the extension. <br />12 <br />