Laserfiche WebLink
development review levels, the subcommittee had put forth a proposal for <br />�W site development review. This proposal basically called for a site <br />development hearing on certain planning applications. This hearing would <br />include interested parties who would present their recommendation to the <br />Planning Director who would make the final decision on the application. <br />These hearings would involve noticing of the neighbors and comments by <br />representatives of the Pathways Committee and Environmental Design and <br />Protection Committees, if appropriate. Minutes of the Site Development <br />Hearings would be prepared and distributed so that all interested parties <br />would be aware of the planning applications being discussed at these <br />hearings. It would also be possible to appeal the Planning Director's decision <br />to the Planning Commission. The subcommittee believed that this would <br />make the process much easier for applicants, would appropriately use the <br />expertise of staff and would allow the Commission to have more time to <br />focus on major planning policy issues. <br />The subcommittee recommended that the following issues be determined by <br />the Planning Director: height applications of 15' to 24', grading between 250 <br />and 1,000 cubic yards, all secondary dwellings, additions of 3,000 to 10,000 <br />square feet, pools and tennis/sports courts (without a new home), driveways <br />with more than 750 square foot increase in development area, additions of <br />900 - 1,500 square feet; 500-900 square foot second story, and antennas/ satellite <br />dishes greater than 63' in height and 12' in diameter. <br />%W Council and Commissioners discussed this proposal regarding the site <br />development process. The thresholds of review as proposed for approval by <br />the Planning Director were also discussed. <br />PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To submit any comments, suggestions, changes on <br />the proposed site development process with particular input on the <br />thresholds of this proposed review to the Planning Director within a week. A <br />meeting will then be held by the Development Process Subcommittee who <br />will review all comments and draft a recommendation with possible <br />ordinance wording to the Planning Commission for review and <br />recommendation to the City Council. Comments were also requested on how <br />many Commissioners would have to appeal an application. Presently the <br />ordinances stated two Commissioners. <br />Council noted that the Subcommittee on Planning Issues (Dauber, Doran, <br />Hubbard and Gottlieb) would be meeting in the near future to address certain <br />provisions of the site development code which needed clarification. In part <br />these issues included: grading, landscaping, lighting, pathways and the appeal <br />procedure. <br />September 19, 1995 <br />Adjourned Regular Meeting <br />