My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Minutes 2019 12 12
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2000-2019 Planning Commission
>
2019 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Minutes 2019 12 12
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/9/2020 1:19:17 PM
Creation date
7/9/2020 10:58:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
12/12/2019
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.
/
13
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 />December 1211, 2019 <br />Page 11 of 13 <br />Howe thanked everyone and noted that everyone seemed to want the development to <br />be completed quickly. He did not think the development would be motivated to complete <br />their project if they had to put up temporary landscaping. He suggested a two-year <br />extension. <br />Hoefner noted that the dirt pile had been there for years and he wanted the applicant to <br />have to come back and tell the Commission what had already been done to satisfy the <br />neighbors rather than saying that it would be done. <br />Moline noted that it was concerning when developers made promises that they did not <br />keep and he was compelled by staff's comments about the PUD extension, which could <br />not get to the zoning issues. He appreciated Commissioner Hoefner's idea, but he was <br />also thinking about Director Zuccaro's comment to address the compliance issues <br />through code enforcement. He did not think the extension was the tool to get at those <br />issues. <br />Hoefner replied that the developers clearly needed the extension and if they denied it <br />tonight the applicant would have to come back. <br />Rice noted that the way to cure the issue is to get the project built and the question was <br />what's the best way to get there. He thought that the enforcement issue needed to be <br />enforced. If the applicant did not do what he said he would do it, the City had to enforce. <br />He was not in favor of a three-year extension and he thought a year was the sweet spot <br />to come pull a building permit. <br />Moline asked Commissioner Rice for his thoughts on if we have the criteria available to <br />hold up or limit the extension. <br />Rice responded that the Commission could grant an extension for whatever amount of <br />time is appropriate to motivate the development but that the code enforcement should <br />be a separate administrative action that takes place now. <br />Williams stated that she had a problem giving three-year extensions to any <br />development that had not gotten off the ground yet. She suggested 18 months as an <br />extension. She agreed with Commissioner Rice that the extension was separate from <br />enforcement. If there was a compliance issue that needed to be enforced throughout <br />the whole city. She noted that if she ... <br />Hoefner was concerned with what would happen 18 months from now and it could be <br />extended later. <br />Howe noted that denying the extension only allows them to go through another PUD <br />and creates obstacles. <br />Ritchie noted they could move to continue to a future meeting. <br />Howe asked what would be needed to make them comfortable with the extension if they <br />continued the hearing. <br />13 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.