14 ATTACHMENTS - Laserfiche WebLink

Council and that it does not want to consider the application. He indicated that staff could take this approach if this is what the Commission desires. Chair Blank noted that even though the Council meeting minutes are not available, there is indirect evidence in the Planning Commission meeting minutes that reference this particular item, which includes a significant discussion on grading. Commissioner Pearce indicated her appreciation for the research staff has thus performed. She inquired if it were possible or likely that the documents being sought are still out there. Ms. Amos replied that she looked at all the records from 1986 to 1992, both in the City Clerk's Office and in boxes from the archives and was unable to find anything on the matter. Commissioner Fox inquired if staff looked at both the Design Review Board meeting and Planning Commission meeting files. Ms. Amos said yes. Commissioner Pearce inquired if staff was simply looking for files relating to re-grading or for conditions of approval for the development which might be contained in other documents. Ms. Amos replied that she looked at landscaping and grading files as well as any type of conditions of approval. In response to Chair Blank's inquiry if the search done was both electronic and manual, Ms. Amos replied that she did both. Commissioner O'Connor expressed concern that staff has not been able to find this information and is not certain that what is at the site is in substantial conformance to Exhibit A. He inquired whether staff is leaving the determination of substantial conformance to the Commissioners who have visited the site. Mr. Dolan replied that this was not the question that was before the Commission. He stated that the applicant went ahead and implemented his plan; he was then informed that the application was still an open issue and that no resolution had yet been reached. He noted that the applicant had a plan that was approved by the Zoning Administrator, but the decision was appealed; hence, the applicant does not have an approved plan at this time. He added that from this perspective, the application is a blank slate. Commissioner O'Connor requested clarification that the substantial conformance of the work the applicant has started and completed is not at issue because there is no approved plan. Mr. Dolan said yes. He added that it would be fortunate for the applicant if what is ultimately approved matches what he has installed. Mr. Roush advised that the Commission should evaluate the application on its own merits, given the testimony and the documents the Commission has at hand, as if no project had been started or no work had taken place. He added that the Commission should determine whether or not it can support the application or some modification thereof or whatever the Commission feels is most appropriate without consideration to EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, September 10, 2008 Page 3 of 25