Laserfiche WebLink
Commissioner Roberts inquired whether Policy 19 and Program 19- were duplicates. <br />r'^ Ms. Stern noted that was true and that a program was specifically implemented as opposed to <br />a policy. <br />Paces VI-44 throutrh VI-47 <br />There were none. <br />The Commission complimented staff on its work on this document. <br />Ms. Stern advised that it would be brought to City Council with the amendments agreed to by <br />the Planning Commission. <br />No action was taken. <br />b. PCUP-152, Vineyard Pro-Wash. LLC <br />Application to modify the operating hours of a previously approved, full-service <br />carwash from 9:00 a. m. to 4:00 p. m. Monday through Friday and from 7:00 a. m. to <br />7:00 n. m. Saturday and Sunday to 7.• DO a. m. to 9:00 p. m. Monday through Sunday. <br />The subject site is located at 3595 and 3597 Utah Street in the Stanley Business Pazk <br />and is zoned PUD-C (Planned Unit Development -Commercial) District. <br />Also consider the Negative Declazation prepared for the project. <br />Continued to April 12, 2006 at the request of the applicant. <br />c. PCUP-153. Jason Skinner <br />Application for a conditional use permit to allow a trade school in an existing tenant <br />suite located at 5572 Springdale Avenue. Zoning for the property is C-R(p) <br />(Regional Commercial [peripheral]) District. <br />Commissioner Blank disclosed that he was unaware until the afternoon of the Planning <br />Commission meeting that the applicant was one of his co-workers. He had received advice <br />from Mr. Roush that there was no conflict. <br />Ms. Decker summazized the staff report and detailed the scope of layout of this project. She <br />advised that a parking analysis was performed between February 15 and February 22, 2006, <br />to assess and evaluate the use of the pazking area and potential conflicts with the intended <br />number (125) of students. Staff believed adequate pazking was available on the site; <br />however, adjacent businesses expressed concern regarding the potential impact on the front <br />parking azea; the business owners preferred that students park farther away from that <br />particulaz suite. Staff included Condition No. 5, which would require a handout to the <br />students requesting that they park farthest from the site in an effort not to impact the adjacent <br />uses; the applicant was amenable to that condition. Staff believed that the findings on page 5 <br />could be met and that this use would be compatible with the surrounding uses. Staff <br />recommended that the Planning Commission approve this application by making the required <br />~~ <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Mazch 8, 2006 Page 7 of 22 <br />