PC 083116 - Laserfiche WebLink

the blacksmith. It has some of these uses that are permitted uses and to get that off in this case a PUD Minor Modification, and that's where I kind of come back to this. When I look at this, I think this is much better, and that's why a Minor CUP process that we kind of shot holes in a little bit earlier, I do want to say I support the idea as he was saying, how do you get that segue to do what I'm going to say which is, I don't want it to be a serial approval. And what I mean by that, like I mentioned earlier, I don't think a serial approval of a Zoning Administrator action to change a condition and then on top of it a Minor CUP mod to get it through staff level at both levels, I don't think that should be allowed. I think that is where just like on Brown Act items, how is a serial meeting conducted? How is serial approval conducted? So you get one and then you get your second without going up again, that's where I get concerned more so than trying to clarify laser tag is the same as indoor recreational. I hope staff understands what I'm trying to point at. Beaudin: Can I paraphrase that a little bit just to make sure I'm clear? So what you're saying is, if you need to amend a PUD to enable a use and then a couple of weeks later you need to do a CUP for that, what you're saying is you need maybe a Zoning Administrator approval for something, your concern is that you get an approval which kind of is the first domino in what you need to get to the end and that's happening maybe not as publicly as you would like. Is that the concern? Commissioner Balch: Don't get me wrong. We see it because we see Zoning Administrator actions, and the one I have is the coding school. Not that we said 'no' to the coding school at the Safeway there on Bernal, right, but that one had and correct me if my memory is incorrect, as it is late in the hour, but the PUD for that had a PUD Minor Mod the first time though. That got approved at the Zoning Administrator level and then they came in for a CUP which is a very minor CUP, very customary, which was a Consent item. I would like to see that because that means one of those is coming here. Beaudin: I understand, and you will continue to see those things. What happens in those scenarios is, essentially, there is a decision made to allow a particular use even if it's a conditional use. It still has to come to hearing, but what you're essentially seeing is step 2 when step 1 was really the enabling act on that use. Commissioner Balch: When we put in place the Minor CUP process. Beaudin: Understood —you want to make sure the full CUP comes back in scenarios where things are.... Commissioner Balch: ... initially on the premise of a Zoning Administrator action. If no Zoning Administrator action is first, meaning you're just a Minor PUD straight up, I have no problem with that concept. I think the noticing that you do, and that was where we were talking about —I'm jumping around pretty good, but the radius of the notice and the time — that's where I challenge you to figure out what you can facilitate but not make too overly burdensome. I don't think I personally have a problem with the 10 and I do know that we could deal with it here knowing that you guys do excellent work to kind of keep us informed of that, but it's the serial meeting. At least that's my biggest sticking point. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, August 31, 2016 Page 49 of 58