PC 081209 - Laserfiche WebLink

With respect to the design review process, Ms. Decker displayed an exhibit and explained that the amendment will clarify and acknowledge that a single-family residence is not an interim use. As regards the concurrent submittal of PUDs and Tentative Maps, Ms. Decker stated that both applications would be reviewed and processed through the Planning Commission, then go forward to the City Council for approval. Ms. Decker noted that the Tentative Map would include a condition that approval would be contingent on PUD approval at the second reading by the Council. She added that there would be a risk the developer takes upon concurrent submittal because any changes to the PUD development plan recommended by the Planning Commission and/or the Council that are not reflected in the Tentative Map would require the developer to provide such changes and revisions to the Map to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Using the Ponderosa Ironwood development as an example, Commissioner Narum recalled that the Planning Commission recommended approval of the PUD but required the applicant to incorporate changes in the Tentative Map, such as installing sidewalks and providing access to trails. She indicated that she wanted to ensure that the developers understand that if they submit their PUD and Tentative Map applications concurrently, they will be obligated to incorporate any changes to the Tentative conditioned by the Commission. Commissioner Blank stated that the Commission can include a condition that approval of the PUD is recommended but the Tentative Map must be changed. Commissioner Narum stated that she wants the developers to understand that if they choose that path, it would be at their own risk. She expressed concern that a developer may come in with both applications and there is some amount of pressure to approve both. Commissioner Blank explained that the Commission still has the ability to recommend changes to the PUD development plan. Chair Pearce concurred. Commissioner Blank inquired if developers would now be required to submit both applications at the same time. Ms. Decker said no. Commissioner Pentin questioned the use of “shall” and “may.” Commissioner Narum reiterated that developers who choose to go that route need to clearly understand there is a risk that they may have to redo the tentative map which can be a significant expense. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, August 12, 2009 Page 21 of 23