PC 091306 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ponderosa Homes expressed concern regarding lighting standards on the site. Ms. Decker noted that a specific condition of approval had not been identified regarding exterior lighting that would address the concerns expressed by Ponderosa, which was to shield the lighting from residential neighborhoods. Staff would like to add the following language to the standard condition: “The applicant shall submit an exterior light plan for the site and building, including photometrics for the review and approval for the Planning Director and Chief Building Official prior to issuance of building permits. The lighting plan shall comply with the City’s Security Ordinance and the following requirements: 1.Lighting shall be directed away from adjacent properties and shall incorporate cutoff shield-type fixtures to prevent glare onto adjacent properties or roadways. 2.The height of the light poles shall not exceed 10½ feet, if additional lighting is necessary to comply with the City’s Security Ordinance, then additional light poles and fixtures shall be provided at the site. 3.Light levels shall not exceed the required foot-candles for security.” Staff also noted that all conditions of approval for Cases PUD-18 and PDR 337 are in effect. She noted that typically, all conditions of approval are required to be a part of the construction documents submitted to the City. However, in this case, the applicant had only been conditioned to provide the most recent, consisting of PDR-377 and the modified conditions of approval for the project before the Commission. Staff has not required all of the PUD-18 conditions to be added to this particular temporary structure. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission make the required use permit findings for PCUP-169 and design review criteria for PDR-377 in the staff report and approve cases PDR-537 and PCUP-169, subject to the conditions of approval as amended. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Blank regarding the definition of “temporary,” Ms. Decker stated that the City has typically offered and processed temporary use permits for one- to two-year periods, which can be extended. The City has not had many projects request a temporary permit for up to ten years. In this particular case, staff examined what the entire business plan and buildout plan was, and wanted to provide the church with adequate flexibility to be able to have the building constructed within the proposed time frame. She noted that funding for this project is based on donations, and could fluctuate considerably. Staff believed this would be adequate for their needs. In response to an inquiry by Acting Chairperson Fox regarding the type of precedent an approval might set for other organizations to come forward with a similar request, Ms. Harryman replied that the Planning Commission and the City should look at each project on a case-by-case basis and attempt to make the findings set forth therein in order to approve or disapprove the project. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 13, 2006 Page 5 of 23