PC 022509 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner O’Connor inquired if there have been complaints received from others in the business park. Ms. Decker replied that none had been received. Commissioner Narum recalled a recent situation where the Planning Commission had upheld the appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s action regarding the trellis because parking had been designated. She inquired whether or not the applicant could be asked to pay for the cost of painting signs designating the parking spaces across from her studio. Chair Pearce stated that as she remembered the case of the trellis, parking spaces were designated because businesses were having trouble getting parking. Commissioner Narum stated that the trellis was not approved because they believed that parking spaces were already designated, but upon further inspection, it appeared that the spaces were designated with painting to a particular business. Chair Pearce stated that if this would trigger asking the entire building to designate parking spaces if the thought was that overflow parking would occur, she was not willing to move in that direction. Commissioner Fox stated that if five students are being taught at the same time and, when the next five students arrive when the first five may still be there, a total of ten spaces would be needed. She added that she did not like the idea of street parking and children exiting the vehicles from the street. Commissioner Narum stated that it would be difficult to restrict on-street parking for some when people park along the street for Quarry Lane School. Commissioner Fox noted that the difference is that Quarry Lane School is a detached building and has its own parking lot and is not a building with shared suites and parking. Commissioner O’Connor noted that the trellis application was the opposite type of parking issue in that one tenant wanted a specific parking space for his business. He stated that in this case, the issue is the overflow into other areas. Commissioner Narum disagreed and stated that what was found was that the other businesses in the building had painted their own designated parking spaces, and the owner was simply trying to call out his spaces via the trellis. She stated that she would rather the Commission condition the applicant to paint her spaces in front of the studio, which would reinforce parents on where they should and should not park. Commissioner O’Connor inquired if staff reviewed whether or not there is adequate parking requirements for the building. Ms. Decker replied that there was adequate parking when staff originally analyzed this project. She added that in this particular expansion analysis, staff also found that four spaces would be adequate because there was on-street parking. She noted that although the on-street parking cannot be counted toward the use, staff believed, after conducting site visits, that it was reasonable to think it was likely a patron of the music studio would park there. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 25, 2009 Page 5 of 29