PC 021115 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Dolan stated that staff did not produce a report with a recommendation on which ones the Commission should do, but he wanted to alert the Commissioners to two that he thinks are worthwhile doing, both of which fall into the category of having been added since this was first distributed to the Commission last week. He then proceeded to explain the two items. Hacienda PUD Modifications (on page 2 of 13) The issue here is that the original PUD approval for Hacienda is now about 35 years old and has been modified a number of times. It is in some other program that the City has long not used, and it is not a very user - friendly document. Some of PUD is outdated, and James Paxson, General Manager of Hacienda Business Park, has constantly reminded staff that it is a fairly significant hindrance to economic development within Hacienda Business Park because people show up and the documents are not clear, not necessarily up -to -date, and are confusing. One of the most confusing things is that the Park was approved in two phases, and the first phase directs staff to calculate traffic impacts using one methodology and the second phase directs staff to use a different methodology: one is based on square footage, and the other is based on trip generation. The reality is, when staff evaluates something, it is always converted from square footage to trips because it is just the logical thing to do. So, in practice it is done one way but the original document says to do it a different way. The other thing that has happened is that new residential guidelines have been added into the regulations at Hacienda, which have not really been incorporated or acknowledged in the original PUD. This is something that needs to be worked on to make it a more usable document. The idea is not to change all the level of development allowed or really the general way that it is approved; it is just to make the materials that say what can be done and how it is processed clearer for the applicants, and theoretically, easier for staff to use as well, as staff turns over. The old- timers are able to wade through it and get to the right page that is appropriate, but somebody brand new may not have a very easy time wading through those documents. This is something that has been talked about for a number of years. James Paxson will talk about it with anyone who will listen and he's been working on Councilmembers, and he has at least one who has sort of taken this on as a pet project. That particular Councilmember will probably be well -served by having the support of the Planning Commission in that regard. Commissioner O'Connor stated that the Planning Commission also talked about it over the last two or three years, and it missed getting on the priority list by maybe one item or priority. Commissioner Nagler inquired what the Planning Commission's role in this would be. Mr. Dolan explained that, ultimately, any PUD amendment requires Planning Commission review and recommendation. He indicated that he does not see this as a big work task for the Commission, but a fairly significant work task for staff, and there will be some consulting help because it will be fairly labor- intensive. He noted that it is PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 11, 2015 Page 10 of 17