Planning Commission Meeting Update

   June 8, 2005                        Wednesday                                7:00 p.m.

CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

ROLL CALL:      Commissioners Carlyn Christianson, Alice Loh, Andrea Miller, Orval Osborne, Andrew Carter, Vice-Chair Jim Aiken, and Chairperson Michael Boswell.  All Commissioners were present.

ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA:

PUBLIC COMMENT:

Jan Marx thanked the Planning Commission for their earlier decision to not recommend approval of the Market Place project.

PUBLIC HEARINGS:

1.   165 Grand Street. AP-PC 72-05: Appeal of the Director’s decision to deny a beauty school at Pacheco School; PF zone; Morris Goatley, applicant. (Jaime Hill)

The applicant/appellant presented there reasons why the project should be approved as submitted and several people testified both for and against the proposed project. On a motion by Commissioner Christianson, seconded by Commissioner Osborne, the commissioners voted 4-3 to uphold the Director’s denial of a School Tenant Permit for a beauty school at Pacheco Elementary School, modifying the findings to eliminate Finding #3 referring to utility use.  Commissioners Aiken, Miller and Carter voted against the motion as they felt that parking problems could be addressed and that the additional traffic generated was minimal.

COMMENT AND DISCUSSION:

2.   Staff

A.      Agenda Forecast

Deputy Director Whisenand gave a forecast of the next two months agendas.

2.      Commission

A.    Growth Management Discussion

Deputy Director Draze gave a brief explanation of both the population and non-residential growth management policies now in effect and the existing situation relative to the policies and adopted regulations.  The Commission discussed both types of growth and how they can be interrelated.  Overall, the Commission agreed that the real problem the City needs to focus on is population growth, not growth in residential units. For now, the Planning Commission wants to change the residential growth management limits to avoid the limits from overly inhibiting the construction of new homes. They also expressed an interest in assuring that residential development be better able to compete for resources when we approach limits. For instance, if water or road capacity becomes a constraint in the future, commercial growth could take the resources away from residential development.

The PC asked staff to return by the end of September with several options on how the current residential growth management policies could be changed and how this will affect the City’s Residential Growth Management Phasing Schedule.  Staff agreed to review department work programs and either develop the options with our present resources or request that the Council authorize necessary assistance if we do not have adequate resources.

The Commission agreed to pick up the topic of non-residential growth and its association with impacts on resources and population increases at a future time.

The meeting ADJOURNED to the rescheduled meeting of the Planning Commission scheduled for Wednesday June 29, 2005, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street.