PC 042308 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Harryman replied that staff would be able to review the public record of the litigation but that she was not sure whether a private action between two neighbors would be relevant as opposed to the general concept of whether a sports court ordinance was warranted. She noted that another staff attorney had been following that action as well. She noted that there could be appeals and that the litigation may not be concluded. In response to an inquiry by Chair Blank regarding the status of the RV/fifth wheel question, Ms. Decker replied that the question arose the previous month. She noted that there were two discussions with respect to RVs: the on-site parking of RVs and a discussion of how to define an RV or motor home more clearly, and that the Code Enforcement staff was still in the process of identifying those items. She stated that the second issue was related to the parking of RVs on the street, and no additional action will be taken as far as a Citywide Code amendment with respect to RV parking issues within the right of way and streets. She noted that they were not necessarily coming to the Planning Commission immediately since the Staples Ranch and the General Plan would be moving forward and would impact the calendar very significantly. Commissioner O'Connor understood that when the fifth wheel/motor home issue had been discussed, the Planning Commission would discuss parking in the right-of--way. Ms. Decker recalled that those were two separate discussions and that the issue of parking in the right-of--way came up before the Planning Commission and was further discussed before the City Council under Matters Open to the Public. The City Council had heard comments from the public with respect to that issue and did not direct staff to take action for any ordinance amendment. She added, however, that there was an acknowledgement that the Council may look at the particular portion that had been examined by the Planning Commission with respect to the parking of motor homes, recreational vehicles, RVs in sideyard setback areas. She added that was mostly a neighborhood impact as far as visual blight, as well as the concerns brought forward by the Planning Commission regarding property values and proximity to side yards. Commissioner O'Connor inquired whether the Council meeting should be reviewed or whether the Planning Commission should ask Council again. He noted that when he brought this issue up two months ago, it was after he had seen the Council meeting; at that time, Mayor Hosterman had asked the City Manager the status of the discussion of RV parking, and the City Manager told the Mayor it had been referred to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Fox noted that it was like the Livermore RV ordinance. Commissioner Narum noted that she understood the meeting concerned the parking on the property and that she did not believe there was any discussion of parking on the street. Commissioner Fox requested City staff to review what had taken place. Commissioner O'Connor suggested that staff ask the Council for clarification or review the meeting. He stated that he understood that parking in general also included on-site parking, as well as public right of way. He noted that both the Planning Commission and City Council had heard many complaints about that issue. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, April 23, 2008 Page 25 of 28