PC 083116 - Laserfiche WebLink

where the uses are uses that support our local economy with people who are moving into the Valley Business Park or other similar business parks here. Hacienda is a great example. You know they support here with the jobs and depending on their size, dictates how long they can wait, and I think the Minor CUP process you're proposing is excellent. I just don't know how we bifurcate out those versus others. But other than that, I think this is excellent. Beaudin: And that's a good example. It's one of those no harm, no foul kinds of scenarios, right? You make a permitted use to do light industrial uses in a light industrial business park. Commissioner Balch: But because of its old PUD, you're trapped up. Beaudin: Right, and that's a major reason we're doing the work we're doing now. We were stumbling around on these and they take a lot of staff time, right? You start to write staff reports and you start to have the City Attorney's office involved and everyone's looking at these things and we're saying they want to pre -fab some sheet metal in a large warehouse. It wasn't working. Commissioner Nagler: So let me just ask a related question. Back to the point to Commissioner Brown raised — you've created for purposes for ease of administration the ability for the Director of Community Development.... Beaudin: I think it's the Zoning Administrator... Commissioner Nagler: Staff level. It says the Director of Community Development but it doesn't matter. For community facility, financial institution, governmental facility, right? Governmental facility. Under personal service, the definition needs to stand on its own and be broad enough to encompass what would interpreted to be all personal services, right? So my question really is pretty straight forward. Why allow for the sort of in -office interpretation on one category, because some of these are pretty obvious right? You're an office business professional— that's pretty obvious. But, something like personal services back to Commissioner Allen's question —why would .... you know what I'm asking? Why would that not be.... Beaudin: I'd actually rather pull out "as determined by the Director of Community Development" in the definition and have that as an over - arching possibility for determining the uses are substantially similar. I don't think you need to say that in the definition because most of our definitions say "including but not limited to" and so it's a redundant catch if you have a catch -all that says kind of the rules of use for the code that the Director of Community Development or the Planning Manager— however we want to put the responsibility —can make those kinds of determinations based on definitions. Commissioner Nagler: Okay, that makes sense. Commissioner Brown: The only other real comment I had was I was a bit confused when I looked at the definitions on page 12 and 13 from a numbering perspective. I assume you're going to clean it up because otherwise all these other definitions are PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, August 31, 2016 Page 51 of 58