PC 01/13/1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

~ wants the deeds for the nine lots to disclose the typical activities d potential impacts of the Fairgrounds. He also asked for clarification on the school impact ees. Mr. Swift explained to the applicants that the school impact fees estimated to be $2.65/sq. ft. The City, school district, and development communi are still trying to reach a final agreement that will make everyone happy. The school dis .ct could adopt the $2.65 figure by State law. David Jones asked whether they could receive de minimis approval for the Fish and Game Department. Discussion ensued between Commissioner Michelotti and David Jo es in regard to the setbacks. She would favor at least 20 ft. between houses. Mr. Jo stated that when they did their planning they went by City guidelines. Commissioner Wright questioned the applicant as to which conditio s he is opposed to. David Jones stated he is opposed to Conditions 15, 17, and 19. In response to Commissioner Wright's question, Mr. Swift stated th t if the Fairgrounds moves their mobile home park across from the proposed project tha the Fairgrounds also has to pay a pro-rata share of the sewer lines. Commissioner Michelotti asked Mr. Swift why the Fairgrounds wis to construct a wall on Rose Avenue across from the proposed project. Mr. Swift said the airgrounds wishes to screen their activities from the neighbors and to provide some sound attenuation. The Fairgrounds is concerned that when people move into the proposed omes that they will then be complaining about the Fairground activity. They feel the wall sh uld alleviate this problem. Mr. Swift pointed out that the Commission does not have approve the wall condition. He reiterated that staff has tried very hard to work with e Fairgrounds to work out any negotiations, which began over a year ago. In response to Chairman Hovingh's question, Mr. Swift stated that e City has no control over what happens in the Fairgrounds, but they do have some contro over water and sewer lines. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CWSED. Chairman Hovingh asked staff about approval of the de minimis findi g. Mr. Swift said a de minimis finding is not necessary for this application, but if it is ap roved it could save the applicant as much as $1,500. The de minimis finding would simply tate that no visible wildlife habitat is on the proposed project site. Planning Commission Minutes January 13, 1993 Page 9