Laserfiche WebLink
8. Policy 18 and related programs specifically address the maintenance and <br />~ improvement issues brought up by the Commission, particulazly the drainage on <br /> the sports fields and the expansion of the swim center. <br />9. Policy 19 addressed the Commission's concern about greater access and longer <br /> hours of operation of several facilities, where it was needed and feasible. <br />10. Policy 24 discussed downtown facilities, including restrooms, wireless <br /> connection, and signage. <br />11. Policy 25 and related programs addressed the diversity issue. <br />12. Program 28.4 discussed facilities and the provision of child care services. <br />Staff requested the Planning Commission's feedback on these changes in order to bring it <br />before the City Council. <br />Chairperson Arkin complimented staff on a job well done in summarizing the <br />Commissioners' comments. <br />In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Blank regazding the standard of restrooms not <br />included, Ms. Stern replied that the discussion at the meeting mentioned a 500-foot distance <br />standazd. <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. <br />Kevin Close, 871 Sycamore Road, noted that at the previous meeting, the suggestion to put <br />~- Happy Valley back into the pazk plan (Program 17.21) had occurred after the public hearing. <br />He expressed concern that the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Happy Valley <br />Specific Plan noted that there was no need for the pazk because of the lazge lots in the azea. <br />He noted that if the City planned to put the park into the General Plan, he would strongly <br />urge that it be specified that the park be placed within the City limits and not in the <br />unincorporated Happy Valley area. <br />Chairperson Arkin noted that the City may not pay for pazks in the County. <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. <br />Chairperson Arkin suggested that the Commission address the document in order. <br />Page VI-1 <br />In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Fox regarding whether "Community Programs" <br />referred to public agencies and nonprofit organizations and whether they all operated without <br />discrimination, Ms. Stem replied that the definition had been problematic when considered <br />by staff. She suggested that the subsequent definition of Community Programs be considered <br />and substitute that for the initial definition in the last sentence of the pazagraph. <br />Commissioner Maas did not caze for the term "run by the City," and suggested replacing <br />"run" with "administered." <br /> <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Mazch 8, 2006 Page 4 of 22 <br />