HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-08-06; Planning Commission; MinutesPlanning Commission Minutes August 6, 2014 Page 1
Minutes of: PLANNING COMMISSION
Time of Meeting: 6:00 p.m.
Date of Meeting: August 6, 2014
Place of Meeting: COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Black called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Commissioner Scully led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
Present: Chairperson Black, Commissioners Anderson, L’Heureux, Montgomery, Scully, Segall
and Siekmann
Absent: None
STAFF PRESENT
Don Neu, City Planner Jane Mobaldi, Assistant City Attorney
Bridget Desmarais, Administrative Secretary Van Lynch, Senior Planner
Austin Silva, Assistant Planner Jason Geldert, Engineering Manager
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Chairperson Black asked if there were any corrections or revisions to the minutes of the meeting from June 18, 2014.
MOTION
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner L’Heureux and duly seconded by Commissioner Siekmann
to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 18, 2014.
VOTE: 4-0-3
AYES: Commissioner Anderson, Commissioner L’Heureux, Commissioner Siekmann and
Commissioner Segall
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Chairperson Black, Commissioner Montgomery and Commissioner Scully
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Chairperson Black asked if there were any corrections or revisions to the minutes of the meeting from July 16, 2014.
Planning Commission Minutes August 6, 2014 Page 2
MOTION
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Scully and duly seconded by Commissioner L’Heureux to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 16, 2014.
VOTE: 6-0-1
AYES: Chairperson Black, Commissioner L’Heureux, Commissioner Montgomery, Commissioner Scully, Commissioner Siekmann and Commissioner Segall
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Commissioner Anderson
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA
None.
PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING
Chairperson Black asked Mr. Neu to introduce the first item and opened the public hearing on Agenda
Items 1 and 2.
1. RP 14-04- TUSCAN OFFICE SUITES – Request for a recommendation of approval of a Major Review Permit to allow for the construction of a 2-story, 3,939 square foot
commercial office building on property located at 2753 Jefferson Street in Land Use District 7 of the Village Review Zone and within Local Facilities Management Zone 1. The project
qualifies as a CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (In-Fill Development Projects) Class 32 Categorical Exemption.
2. SDP 14-03/CDP 14-04 – CP JUNIPER APARTMENTS – Request for approval of a Site
Development Plan and Coastal Development Permit to demolish an existing single-family home, shed and detached garage to allow for the development of a four-unit multiple-family
residential apartment project on a 0.2 acre infill site located at 385 Juniper Avenue, within the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program and Local Facilities Management Zone
1. The project site is not within the appealable area of the California Coastal Commission. The City Planner has determined that this project is exempt from the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301, for the demolition of a single family residence and accessory structures, and Section 15303, for the
construction of no more than four dwelling units in an urbanized area of the State CEQA Guidelines and will not have any adverse significant impact on the environment.
Mr. Neu stated Agenda Items 1 and 2 would normally be heard in a public hearing context; however the
projects appear to be minor and routine in nature with no outstanding issues and staff recommends approval. He recommended that the public hearing be opened and closed, and that the Commission
proceed with a vote as a consent item. Staff would be available to respond to questions if the Commission or someone from the public wished to comment on Items 1 or 2.
Chairperson Black asked if there were any members of the audience who wished to speak on Items 1 or 2.
Seeing none, he opened and closed public testimony.
DISCUSSION
Commissioner Montgomery commented that regarding utilizing the parking in-lieu program with Agenda Item 1, while he is not against it, it seems that the City Council should consider parking within the Village
and it needs to be proactive. This project is an experiment to promote investment in the village. The city should be trying to provide parking as this project develops.