PC 062701 - Laserfiche WebLink

Maas suggested that the applicant consult with a private attorney regarding this matter. r- Discussion ensued regarding this condition. It was noted that this is a standard condition for PUD approvals. Commissioner Harvey asked if the applicant is intending to actually install photovoltaic panels or just provide provisions for the installation. Mr. Miller advised that they are making provisions for the panels and that they will look into installing the panels. Commissioner Harvey asked if the applicant would agree to add the requirement that mechanical provisions shall be added in the roof to mount photovoltaic panels. Mr. Miller agreed to this. Commissioner Harvey asked that the condition included in the Centex PUD be included in this approval. Mr. Miller stressed that they are not developers, and cost is definitely a concern. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Discussion ensued regarding the kennel use. Mr. Pavan advised that the kennel and dogs belong to a caretaker who resides on the PGS site. Commissioner Arkin stated that he would like to add a condition that asks City staff to attempt to resolve this issue, and if it cannot be resolved, the applicants be allowed to install a solid fence. ,-- Ms. Seto advised that when this use was placed on the site it conformed to the legal allowed uses for the County's zoning of this property. She further advised that the City cannot make them remove the use until such time that they try to expand the use, or terminate it for a certain length of time. She agreed that the answer to this matter might be working with PGS to develop a solution that might be more amiable. Commissioner Arkin suggested that as a back-up, a temporary solid wood fence be allowed. Discussion ensued regarding the cost of the installation of a fence for an interim period. It was the consensus of the Commission that it would like to have staff involved in dialogue with PGS in an attempt to resolve the situation, and if nothing can be resolved, the applicant be allowed to construct a solid wood fence for an interim period. Commissioner Arkin expressed concern about Condition #63, which requires the reimbursement for infrastructure costs. Commissioner Roberts noted that this is different than the SullivanlLemoine issue, in that this is a requirement for reimbursement which is a major part of the Vineyard Corridor development. Vice Chairperson Maas confirmed that Commissioner Arkin's concern is related to having an agreement between Delco and the applicant for this PUD as a condition. Commissioner Arkin stated that the City should require that the soundberm and infrastructure be put in place, and the property owner has the responsibility of determining how this will be accomplished. He stated that the City should only require the end result. Ms. Seto advised that the earlier situation was really talking about compensation for a property interest, and this situation is talking about public improvements, and this is a situation where the City typically steps in to make sure that costs are apportioned equitably. Discussion ensued regarding the implications and enforcement of this condition. Commissioner Arkin suggested that additional language be added that unless a separate agreement is reached the costs shall be reimbursed on a prorata basis. ,-- PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 27, 2001 Page 11