SR 05:244 - Laserfiche WebLink

PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION On May 11, 2005, the Planning Commission unanimously approved Phase I of the project subject to amended conditions of approval. The Commissioners discussed at length the impacts that would be generated by the expansion of the Church from 250 to 450 seats and by the anticipated growth and expansion of the Church related to the building locations and sizes. The Commission had concerns that the approval for all three phases at this time would limit future City discretion if future requests would only be a review of the design of each phase related to the approved master plan. The applicant had requested an approved phased master plan to ensure that as each phase moves forward, the approvals are in place to justify the investments made, particularly at Phase I, because each phase is interconnected by function and design. However, the Commission only approved Phase I of the application. The applicant would need in the future an amendment to the use permit plus design review approvals to allow Phases I1 and III to proceed. ANALYSIS The appeal filed by Carl Pretzel and Phillip Sayer addressed several issues concerning notification of the proposed development, compliance to the General Plan, building layout, existing parking/circulation pattern, parking lot expansion and safety, noise from the existing preschool, and prohibition of future expansion of the preschool program. Neighborhood Meetings Prior to the hearing held by the Planning Commission, staff hosted two neighborhood meetings. All Valley Trails residents were sent written notices and were invited to attend and comment on the proposal. First Neighborhood Meeting: The proposal presented at the December 6, 2004 neighborhood meeting included the creation of a new driveway off National Park Koad, a residential street that abuts St. Clare's property to the west. This proposed driveway location raised concerns with the residential property owners in the Valley Trails neighborhood. Approximately 12-15 residents attended the meeting. The residents had the following comments/concerns: · They did not want a new driveway offNational Park Road · The current property maintenance was questionable They did not want an expansion of the existing preschool program · They were concerned about the possible activities in the parking lot · They did not like the courtyard location and requested the buildings be grouped to create internal circulation rather than having a new driveway. SR:0 5:15 4 Page 4