PC 012313 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner O'Connor inquired if the City has done that extensive of a cut and fill. Mr. Dolan said yes. Mr. Dolan continued that the next issue which generated quite a bit of discussion was whether or not public and /or private streets are subject to this 25- percent provision, if they are considered to be structures. He noted that when the Commission had a Work Session on this, it decided to take the most conservative approach to start with and suggested that they could be considered a structure. He further noted that the Commission determined that was not necessarily the intent and that it probably was too conservative. He stated that staff presented that question to Council and its ultimate decision was that it believed that they should be considered structures. He noted, however, that in making its motion, there was a lot of dialogue which was not very clear; about how, in a public hearing, the Council might be able to consider certain roads and essentially make an exception. He further noted that when the motion was ultimately made, the Council referred to an alternative that was in the staff report and the alternative did not expressly mention a process for an exception. He added that staff had not even considered exceptions until that meeting, but the Council suggested that it wanted an opportunity to do something different, something of an exception, particularly in the case of trying to accommodate some sort of public facility such as a park or to get up to a park or a reservoir or some other City facility. He indicated that following this discussion, the way staff wrote this draft ordinance is that there is an exception process there for that, and staff did not make a distinction of whether or not it was for private development versus public development. He added that the other aspect of this is that there are certain roads that have been identified in previous planning efforts, namely Specific Plans and approved PUDs, that have possible good reasons for exemption because multiple decisions have been made based on those, and because those decisions were made in advance of Measure PP, and therefore, should be accommodated for those. He stated that this was actually a suggestion staff made to the Council, who had a lot of discussion about its pros and cons, and ultimately decided to leave those exceptions in. Chair Blank asked Mr. Dolan if he meant leaving those exceptions in or leaving the exception process in. Mr. Dolan clarified that he was referring to the specific exceptions for something that was envisioned in an approved PUD or a Specific Plan and not to the exception process. He continued that staff included PUDs because staff had not done all the research to figure out what is out there that could be affected by this. He added that it does not necessarily have to reference a PUD, and all the ones staff can think of are actually just referenced in a Specific Plan, and it would be adequate just to have something carved out for roadways as envisioned in a Specific Plan. He noted that there may be a PUD that staff just has not been able to determine, but either it is approved and it is going to happen as it is entitled and vested, or it is subject to this ordinance. He indicated that he is not sure if that language is still necessary; however, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, January 23, 2013 Page 9 of 44