PC 122706 - Laserfiche WebLink

Acting Chairperson Fox requested that the language be simplified and examples be included in the different categories so the texts can be more easily read and understood by the general public. Ms. Decker clarified that staff was trying to be as concise as possible while capturing everything in a generalized sense and providing breadth. She noted that enumerating items within a category could result in exceptions that eventually would need to be fitted in. She added that this would be a good discussion point when the matter comes back to the Commission. Acting Chairperson Fox noted that Beth Emek's conditional use permit had a restriction on the types of classes that could be offered because of traffic considerations. She inquired if a facility with an approved conditional use permit would now be allowed to conduct private uses within the facility or would the conditional use permit have to be revised to allow these permitted uses regazdless of the pre-existing restrictions such as hours of operation and number of students. Ms. Harryman replied that if these uses aze now permitted in the zoning district and all the criteria aze met, then these uses are permitted, and the conditional use permit will not have to be revised. Commissioner Olson stated that he was in favor of this Code amendment and inquired if a facility with a permitted use that initially has 24 students but eventually exceeds that number and the neighbors complain would now require a conditional use permit. Ms. Han•yman replied that this would not become a Code Enforcement matter. Commissioner Olson inquired if this would be handled on the staff level or if it would need to come before the Commission. Ms. Decker explained the Code Enforcement procedure and stated that a dialogue with the applicant would determine if a conditional use permit would be required, in which case, it would come before the Commission either as a Consent Calendaz or public hearing item. Commissioner O'Connor inquired what the process would be for a facility with a conditional use permit that allows only 15 students because of pazking considerations and is now grandfathered in but does not have pazking for 25. Ms. Harryman replied that the permit is not just that the facility has 25 students or less but that they also meet certain criteria, which include adequate pazking; therefore, if there is no adequate pazking, then it would not be a permitted use. Ms. Decker stated that staff would send the materials for this proposal as soon as they aze collated and organized and not wait for the week before the hearing date to give the Commission sufficient time to review the materials. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES December 27, 2006 Page 16 of 19