PC 09/10/97 - Laserfiche WebLink

. . . Doug Geist, 1029 Riesling Drive, stated that he opposes the issuance of the use permit. He stated that his issues are centered around the use of a residential property for a commercial business that will impact the character of the residential neighborhood, specifically the increase of traffic flow and the increase of transient parking, and to a lesser degree, the increase in noise. He noted that this is the first time that a permit for a swim school is being considered and that he sees a difference between this type of use and lessons for piano lessons. He expressed concern regarding the standard math model used by staff to determine traffic for this use. He asked that the Planning Commission give serious consideration to the issues and concerns that he has described. Ms. Harpster commented that the most that people are her house is 35 minutes and that most of her neighbors are at work during her hours of operation. PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED In response to an inquiry from Commissioner Kumaran, Mr. Iserson advised that this is the first application for a non-exempt home occupation permit to operate swim lessons at a residence, and that the use would be reviewed in a year. He also noted that the conditions provide for review if any concerns are brought forward prior to that time. Commissioner Wright commented on the staff s scenario to project traffic trips, noting that this is basically an average of trips and that he believes what staff has suggested as far as the number of trips and the parking arrangement is correct and that the traffic wouldn't be detrimental to the neighborhood atmosphere. Commissioner Lutz stated that he feels the swim lessons provide an important service for the community and that he has no doubt that Ms. Harpster runs classes in a very professional manner. He also feels that staff s suggestions to mitigate the traffic impacts and parking are good ones, but he concludes that there will be more vehicular traffic here than a residence would have. He noted that in the way he reads the Zoning Ordinance, he, unfortunately, cannot support the application. Commissioner Barker stated that there are a lot of in-home businesses, and she feels it is a good use and certainly would have less impact than a family day care. She advised that she would like to see Ms. Harpster expand her hours and would support evening lessons until 6:30 p.m. She also would like to allow more than one student in the last session, but limit the number of vehicles to two. She stated that she didn't think the Saturday hours should be expanded. Commissioner Kumaran noted that those present have expressed the value of this business to the community and he feels this is a positive, and, therefore, something he would like to support. He stated that he wondered if three or four of his neighbors were to have an enterprise similar to this how would he feel as a neighbor and what kinds of impacts would he experience. He noted that the parking and traffic would certainly have a negative impact. He recognized the support shown for Ms. Harpster and her gift for teaching children, but he stated that he could not support the application. Chair Cooper stated that he sees reasons as to why it is appropriate to conduct swimming lessons at a residence in that it provides for a situation not available in a commercial setting. He noted that the applicant seems willing to work with the neighbors. He stated that he feels the hours of operation are fair. He also commented that a condition allows for the use to be reviewed within a year. He Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 September 10, 1997