Laserfiche WebLink
Chairperson Fox requested clarification on whether Consent Calendar items are those <br />items which have not had any opposition. Ms. Decker replied that these items are <br />generally straightforward projects that have no issues, fit nicely into the neighborhood, <br />and have no real need for a staff presentation to the Commission. She added that in the <br />past, staff has included not only applications for use permits but also for design review <br />and planned unit developments that did not have any controversial issues. <br /> <br />Chairperson Fox noted that PDR-563, Stanley Center, is being considered as a Consent <br />Calendar item and inquired if this has previously come before the Commission as a work <br />session or if this is a completely new project. She added that if it was new, she wanted to <br />know why it was a Consent Calendar rather than a Public Hearing item. She noted that <br />multiple retail buildings and a gas station near the Stanley Boulevard/Bernal <br />Avenue/Valley Avenue corner had each taken several public hearings. Ms. Decker <br />replied that this is a new project and added that it is not a policy to have a work session <br />for all new projects. She explained that staff felt that there is no issue with the design and <br />that the structure and use fit within the Stanley Business Park. She added that if any <br />controversy or issue arises upon notification, the item can be moved to the Public <br />Hearing section. <br /> <br />Chairperson Fox requested clarification regarding whether the Commission could pull an <br />item from the Consent Calendar upon receipt of the agenda or if the Commissioners <br />should wait until the meeting. Ms. Decker replied that the Commission could always let <br />staff know ahead of time if it wants to pull an item from the Consent Calendar and that <br />staff is prepared to answer questions or present a staff report on these items. She <br />encouraged the Commission, however, to give staff the opportunity to answer any <br />questions ahead of time rather than summarily pulling items from the Consent Calendar. <br />She noted that in most cases, staff is able to alleviate these concerns, and if there are <br />overriding issues or if the Commission feels the issues have not been completely <br />addressed, it would be appropriate to consider the projects as a Public Hearing items. <br /> <br />In response to Chairperson Fox’s question regarding whether Consent Calendar items are <br />noticed in the newspaper, Ms. Decker said yes. <br /> <br />Commissioner Olson indicated that he would not be able to attend the May 16, 2007 <br />meeting and requested that his packet be delivered just the same. Ms. Decker noted that <br />packets are always delivered whether or not a Commissioner can make it to a meeting. <br /> <br />Commissioner Narum inquired if the Oak Grove project would be the only item on the <br />May 23, 2007 agenda. Ms. Decker replied that the Oak Grove project would be the only <br />Public Hearing item but that there would be other minor use permit Consent Calendar <br />items for the Commission to conduct business. <br /> <br />Chairperson Fox noted that there was a Consent Calendar item regarding a fifth wheel <br />and inquired what a fifth wheel was. Commissioner O’Connor replied that it is a big <br />trailer. <br /> <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 25, 2007 Page 6 of 11 <br /> <br /> <br />