2010-10-27_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, October 27, 2010 Page 3 Ms. Radjek reviewed past discussions she’d had with the School District regarding the 95 portable unit, with them suggesting putting it unit on a cement slab to make it more 96 permanent. 97 By consensus, staff was directed to review the Parks and Recreation and Institutional 98 Districts, as well as at construction sites in all districts, to determine Performance 99 Standards for temporary or more permanent placement, screening, and other issues 100 related to them. 101 Mr. Paschke noted that Performance Standards were on the next meeting’s agenda for 102 discussion; and staff would draft language to allow vetting through the Public Hearing and 103 City Council process prior to adoption. 104 Ms. Radjek opined that zoning for the Parks and Recreation District as well as the 105 Institutional District needed to be reviewed to provide buffer requirements for school 106 and/or city use; ensuring identification and accountability specific users for enforcement 107 of standards for consistency between how a property is zoned and how it is used. 108 In the Parks District, Mr. Paschke addressed setbacks and property line separations 109 through landscaping, consistent with the Parks Master Plan; however, he noted that in 110 the instance addressed by Ms. Radjek, the property was not a park, but a school 111 (Institutional), creating inconsistencies. Mr. Paschke questioned if the Commission 112 wanted to provide similar regulations for recreational facilities in Institutional Districts, 113 language that staff could easily incorporate. However, Mr. Paschke noted that the 114 language would not change where things are located at the Fairview Community Center 115 site; suggesting that if another ball field was installed, there would be no natural 116 landscaping or fence unless it was addressed in code for implementation. Mr. Paschke 117 expressed concern, and a lack of realistic examples, for ball fields with screening of the 118 magnitude that it would screen parking lots from residential properties. 119 Member Gottfried opined that logic should prevail and if an Institution was planning use 120 similar to a Park and Recreation use, the same requirements should prevail fro that use; 121 and spoke in support of parallel language inside the Institutional District to address 122 similar uses. 123 Member Cook concurred; except that suggestion didn’t significantly address Ms. Radjek’s 124 concerns; with a buffer not solving her specific problem. 125 Mr. Paschke clarified that general Performance Standards applying to all districts were 126 distinct and separate from those Performance Standards unique or specific to a Certain 127 District and addressed accordingly, such as differentiated in the Parks and Institutional 128 Districts. Mr. Paschke advised that, if the Commission was interested in specific 129 regulations for a buffer strip adjacent to residential properties for certain types of 130 Institutional uses; staff could modify language to meet that requirement. 131 Ms. Radjek, specifically addressing refuse blowing through the neighborhood, expressed 132 her concern that if she complained too much, she would then be looking at a huge 133 permanent dumpster located on the tennis courts; and asked that the Commission also 134 address that concern. 135 Mr. Paschke advised that the situation was covered under current code, but needed 136 regulating; however, he didn’t know if the school was meeting those regulations given the 137 long-term use over the years and changes to City Code. Mr. Paschke noted that the only 138 technical way the City could address how the school took care of their refuse and enforce 139 standards was if the school made modifications or improvements to the property; and that 140 the City may be limited even then depending on legal, non-conforming issues versus 141 retroactive issues. 142 Vice Chair Boerigter closed the Public Hearing at 6:13 p.m., with no one else appearing 143 to speak. 144 Discussion by Commissioners and staff 145