Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10291998 Min Ag · · · CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Council Chambers, 7:00 PM Business Meeting October 29, 1998 I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: October 1, 1998 (from 10/22/98 packet) October 15, 1998 III. COMMUNICATIONS: Current mail IV. OLD BUSINESS A. City of Port Townsend Parks & Recreation Functional Plan 1. 2. 3. Staff Report (Paula Mackrow) Public Testimony Commission Discussion and Conclusions V. NEW BUSINESS VI. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Next Scheduled Meetings November 12, 1998 Rosewind PUDA Amendment #5 (not a hearing) VII. ADJOURN ... . . . CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Council Chambers, 7:00 PM Business Meeting I. ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES III. COMMUNICATIONS: Current mail IV. OLD BUSINESS A. City of Port Townsend Parks & Recreation Functional Plan 1. 2. 3. Staff Report (Paula Mackrow) Public Testimony Commission Discussion and Conclusions V. NEW BUSINESS VI. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Next Scheduled Meetings October 29, 1998 November 12, 1998 Rosewind PUDA Amendment #5 (not a hearing) VII. ADJOURN . . . PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Business Meeting October 29, 1998 I. ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall by Chair Cindy Thayer. Other members in attendance were Karen Erickson, John Boles, Nik Worden, and Larry Harbison. Lois Sherwood was excused. Staff members present were Paula Mackrow, Director of Public Works Bob Wheeler and City Attorney Tim McMahan. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion to approve the minutes of October 1, 1998 as written was made by Mr. Boles and seconded by Mr. Worden. All were in favor. Motion to approve the minutes of October 15, 1998 as written and amended and to be further amended by Ms. Erickson was made by Mr. Worden and seconded by Mr. Boles. All were in favor. III. COMMUNICA nONS: Current Mail IV. OLD BUSINESS A. City of Port Townsend Parks & Recreation Functional Plan 1. Staff Report (Paula Mackrow) Ms. Mackrow asked Mr. Mark Welch, City Council representative and Chair of the Parks & Recreation Committee, to comment on the Functional Plan. Mr. Welch indicated this is the first Parks & Recreation Functional Plan update since 1991. He noted this may have had the most public participation and input of any plan ever produced. He said out of several thousand people surveyed, they had 54 percent response and explained that the goals and directions outlined in this Plan will serve the community well over the next several years, especially concerning the need for neighborhood parks, the need to consolidate resources, and the need to expand the recreation program. He said the recreation program is growing by at least 100 percent per year and is a source of justifiable city pride. Ms. Mackrow summarized the process and the Functional Plan. She noted basic elements: need for planning for future parks; documentation of the Recreation Department history of projects and programs; future goals; major components -- parks and open space. ". · · · · I Planning Commission Minutes October 29, 1998 Page 2 Existing city parks were defined based on national standards: þ> Neighborhood Parks -- over an acre of land including certain things like restrooms, play area, picnic shelters and some sort of sport or activity fields. þ> Pocket Parks & Urban Open Space Components -- smaller parks such as along the waterfront that tend to be much less than an acre. Existing city parks were also mapped according to national standards: þ> Nei~borhood Parks -- within ~ mile radius and a 10 to 15 minute walking range; (something you walk in and out of on a neighborhood sort of scale). þ> School areas -- meeting some of the criteria of neighborhood parks but no open public restrooms and closed to public access during most of the daylight hours 9 months of the year; (partly served and partly not -- possibly having large components of newly zoned multi- family units). þ> Newly zoned. multi-family: areas of town not served at all within ~ mile. þ> Commercial areas: areas of town not served at all within ~ mile; þ> Areas south of Sims Way: no public access to park facilities (even though an old and well developed neighborhood). She indicated that subsequent to mapping, they tried to develop goals and policies on how to address future development and funding of the parks themselves. Proposals in the Capital Facilities Plan (major components of the Park"S Plan): þ> Existing City-owned properties: -- areas identified to be served having potential development of at least an acre of property (areas pointed out on the map within a ~ mile radius that managed to cover a pedestrian access radius for the whole town). Each park cost estimate is based on the planning process for the 35th Street Park, approximately $165,000 in today's market, spread out over 20 years (long-range plan based on the Comp Plan 20-year buildout). þ> Commercial areas & Urban Open Space -- how to address urban open space as an important component of future commercial development (cited existing small parks enjoyed downtown along the waterfront). Recommendations include development standards to help new developments have those amenities within their commercial/industrial development, e.g. the Business Park dedicated open space. Recommendations also include an assessment of Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) and sub-divisions (i.e., Hamilton Heights, Lynnesfield, and Rosewind) and analysis of how much open space and storm water area they have left compared to their planned build-out area. This would help to define a community norm that future ordinances could be based on for that kind of set aside, especially in multi-family areas, making on-site areas available in those high density areas, in addition to neighborhood parks that would serve the community as a whole. þ> Open Space -- an inventory of maps of existing open space, and the potential open space map, goals and policies from the Comprehensive Plan. This is included in the Parks Plan so land set aside and development components can be all together in one functional plan. · · · · I : Planning Commission Minutes October 29, 1998 Page 3 2. Public Testimony Chair Thayer opened the meeting to public testimony. Ms. Barb McColgan Commended those who worked on the Parks & Recreation Functional Park Plan, that it had brought together a lot of policies and priorities from a number of different sources and reflects a lot of concern for the community. She said she was struck by how one piece of property meets so many of the Functional Plan's priorities. It is at the bottom of the stormwater runoff system, located in an ecologically sensitive area, it affords Port Townsend's unparalled views ofthe strait, it has an existing historical building on it, it is adjacent to a park which is acknowledged to be the most used park in the entire city. It is in an area where nearly every other platted 50 x 100 foot lot is being built up and built out, and it is in an area with probably the greatest population pressure on it. She said the best thing is that the City already owns the land, and maintains it at the lowest possible amount of $600/per year; it is the Golden Age Club property. She asked the Commission in finishing the Functional Plan to add two statements regarding the description of the Golden Age Club: II' The property should be considered for inclusion in the Capital Facilities development as an integral part of Chetzemoka Park. II' In the interim, this property must be held in reserve for future park needs. (Because everyone realizes the constraints of the funding problems.) Regarding the open space section and public access section, she said that is a rather new concept. It is a great idea that we are realizing in Port Townsend that open space is important. She said one thing being addressed in open spaces are street ends, e.g., street ends mapped at the end of Reed Street and a number of other street ends in town. She questioned why the street ends at the bottom of Taft Street and the jog to Hudson Street were not included. She said it is grassed over and no one can drive there; people don't often realize it is public property and potential public access to a very nice view and a signature of Port Townsend. She asked if there were any plans of including that in the open space or addressing that as part of the street ends? Ms. Mackrow said she has not been aware of that. They discussed the location of the Golden Age Club. Ms. McColgan said it used to be part of the old fort system, an observation post. She suggested including that in the Functional Plan, that it is a wonderful facility. fvIr. Scott Walker He said he loves these Park Plans. He worked on the last one and just now saw the new one. It is the same format and looks like a lot of things have been brought up to date and a lot of old things improved. · · · · . . : Planning Commission Minutes October 29, 1998 Page 4 He spoke regarding recreation facilities: II' City Pool. (No longer related to the school.) It is great that the City is running a recreation program around the pool. II' City Golf Course. He is glad for the City golf course. He said he is most concerned over the potential loss of two private recreation facilities that provide a great deal of recreation for our adults and children. He said as far as he knows, they are not mentioned in the Parks Plan; it seems like there is an opportunity here for the City to make sure they do not lose these important recreation facilities: II' Bowling Alley. Before the Planning Commission as a quasijudicial rezone. He sees it as even larger, that if the City was to look at that as an integral part of City recreation facilities, they may be able to work out a different partnership and not lose something that has a great record of providing entertainment for kids. According to the owner, in the 18 years he has owned it there have been only two minor incidents of kids getting out of hand there on Friday and Saturday night recreation. Also, there are currently about 200 to 250 members of bowling leagues. He said he did not know what they were planning to do if the bowling alley were to sell and change its use to non-bowling. He said they have said they can't bowl there and can't bowl anywhere in Jefferson County. Maybe it is not the right place for it, if it is too costly to operate there reasonably, but his fear is that the only place to build a new bowling alley is beyond where it is within walking or biking distance for most kids. Its location right now is ~ in that respect and he thinks it is one facility that maybe needs to be discussed at least in the Plan. II' Roller rink. There has been a for sale sign on it for years. It is a funky building, but again it is a great location. He said it gets a tremendous amount of use all year long. He said if we lose these two, we have basically lost a huge part of the active recreation facilities in town. He noted we still have the passive ones and are developing those. Mr. Allen Fran15:, Candidate for City Council Position # 1 He said his comments are addressed to the Greenway request to add an agricultural designation to the Comp Plan. Chair Thayer pointed out that the hearing tonight is for the Parks & Recreation Plan and that they had the hearing on the Greenway request last week. She reminded Mr. Frank he will have opportunity to speak at the public hearing during the City Council meeting November 2nd. Ms. Nancy Speser, Spoke on behalf of recreation, specifically the pool. She said she has been in this community for almost 9 years. She works at the pool and addressed the trend she has seen in the - -.--.. ._~ · · · · . · .- Planning Commission Minutes October 29, 1998 Page 5 last 9 years. The usage has doubled, probably tripled and covers all ages of the population -- children, middle aged people, and particularly the older segment of our population. The pool is an aging facility; there are many repairs that have taken place recently and many more repairs that need to be made. The number of people using the facility has doubled or tripled. City resources are limited, and staff is limited causing a lot of pressure on the present staff that they do have to try to accommodate the very large increase of numbers they have been seeing at the pool, particularly the older population. She noted the pool is being used right now for a therapy facility for a lot of people recuperating from injuries; they have been referred to by doctors in this town and all over for therapy and recuperation. They are getting more and more people every week, and don't have the resources to accommodate these people. She said she is a little concerned about that because she is a professional, and it reflects poorly on the professional that has to deal with the problems of accommodating people with various needs. She said personally it has doubled her work load, and she is already at capacity; they don't have a large staff right now of qualified people who can deal with the increase in numbers of people they are getting. There are almost 60 kids in swim team this year. It is a very good program and a very good recreational opportunity for kids of our community. She is concerned about the condition of the pool, some of the repairs that need to be made and the limited resources. She said in the 9 years she has been there she has seen the trend and is very well aware of what is going on at the pool, that she is there at the pool a lot of the time; if there is anyone that knows what is going on there at the pool, she is the one. She is concerned about the numbers, the trend is just getting bigger, more people coming to the pool and not being able to handle the increased usage and things people are asking for. The public is asking for more and more, and they do not have the resources. Chair Thayer asked Ms. Speser if she was aware this is not a budgetary hearing tonight, that they are here to do a 20 year Parks & Recreation Plan. She said she wanted to make sure she understood that, and asked if Ms. Speser had a recommendation for the Plan, or if she just wanted them to make sure they consider more facilities for the pool. Ms. Speser replied her main point is that there is a trend toward more usage of the pool, and she thinks that should have future consideration. Mr. Scott Walker One thing that has always gnawed at him is the number of parks facilities that are in the historic district of town, not to say there is anything wrong with that -- it is one of the great attractions for town. He said to continue that level of attraction, to continue to the norm, within ~ mile walking distance of most residences, we are setting a standard that is a much lower level of service for all of the newly developing area of town than in the existing section of town. He said he personally does not live in the historic district -- close to it, outside where everything 0_ · · · · . . .' Planning Commission Minutes October 29, 1998 Page 6 almost overlaps. He said one of the things he thinks would continue to make the town attractive for the newly developing areas, is to look at the purchase of small pocket parks, beside the large ones that have been delineated on the map in the larger circles. Ms, Lynn Hersey. As a member of the Parks & Recreation Commission she voiced her concern in the past to the City Council about the 35th Street Park. She said it is a piece of property that was donated by the county; it has been sitting there for 3 years, and very little has been done to put the Plan into place. She said even though Bob Wheeler and Mark Welch have given a statement that they would be developing it, she would like to ask the Planning Commission make it a bigger priority than it is in the Functional Plan. She said Mr. Wheeler indicated it would be 8 years of developing and she asked to add a park facility fee earlier than that. She stated the reason that with the Parks & Recreation program growing so extensively, they are seeing a real need for practice facilities; that is what the 35 Street Park has been designated. She said, now Port Townsend High School is sending their school teams down to a park in the County; they have to drive all that way because we do not have facilities here in town. She said they are at the mercy of using school facilities and also Fort Worden. The City of Port Townsend does not own its own. She said she would like them to look at that tonight and maybe readjust the priorities, and put 35th Street as one of the top priorities for the Parks & Recreational Plan. Ms. Barb McColgan Asked for clarification on Mr. Walker's comments, if he was asking for the Functional Plan to readdress a portion of support for pocket parks inside of town rather than newer areas? Mr. Walker Certainly not a decrease -- in addition to what we have. He said everybody wants to live in the historic district because of all the events and pocket parks. Chair Thayer closed the public hearing. 3. Commission Discussion and Conclusions Chair Thayer reported for the public that the Planning Commission has had two full workshop meetings on this Plan in the past year and explained if there is not a lot of discussion about some parts of it, it is because they have been through it in their workshops, She asked if any of the Commissioners wanted to address any of the concerns expressed by the public. - · · · · · · .' Planning Commission Minutes October 29, 1998 Page 7 Mr. Worden: Noted that he is relatively new and was not here for one of those workshops. He stated there were a number of public comments made about priorities established in the Plan and said from his recall, the principal means of those priorities being established is the fiscal schedule for expenditure of funds. He said he did not find that there was another way of prioritizing recommendations, and asked staff if that was correct. Ms. Mackrow: In the recommendation section specifically for parks, what she did not address in the presentation is there are two levels of service standards (LOS) for parks. The Comp Plan has basic gross acreage per capita; one priority set by the first set of recommendations adopts this new LOS. The old LOS in the Comp Plan was based on all the existing parks. There is some analysis in here which shows, if they stay ,"vith that gross acreage wr..ich the Plan recommends, at what point you would need 1 more acre for an additional 1,000 people. What this does, by using pieces of these public properties, is to validate the Comp Plan gross acreage per capita, \vrule planning for that slow increase in population. That is why the new LOS for the new part of town is not the same density as in the old part of town. Within that recommended LOS, there is a prioritization for acquisition (Priority 12) and one for development (Priority 15). Essentially, there is nothing in this Plan in conflict with Ms. Hersey's suggestion; the 35th Street Park is the only park that is in the Capital Facilities funding schedule, and it is the top priority. That would be a Council budgetary issue, or to put in a specific statement. The priority that Ms. Speser alluded to, recreation and recreation facilities is rather split because you deal with recreation facilities as they are in parks or schools; they are a capital facility. In the Recreation Section, there is an analysis of recreation facilities that this Plan doesn't recommend an LOS for recreational facilities. It does, in a sense, put out the analysis that this is what we have, this is estimate of population per indoor swimming pool, this is a national or regional standard for indoor swimming pools, and this is the point we would probably outgrow the swimming pool. That analysis is within the Plan, and from there future Councils could draw conclusions or set budgetary priorities. One of the ways priorities were set, because this has been a 2-year process, was looking at the response from the surveys, and yet the Parks & Recreation Commission and the oversight committee recognized that the highest priority in the survey was open space for passive recreation and walking trails which has been implemented through the Non-Motorized Plan. Improvements at the swimming pool ranked within the top ten after open space and new neighborhood parks. Those recreation facilities came in there. The survey was taken right after the School District completed its bond project which opened the track and track/soccer field and two new fields and tennis courts. During the survey time they were probably meeting the town's capacity, and that probably has changed in that 2 years. Mr. Wheeler: The Capital Improvement Plan is an indication of priorities. It should be clear that the 35th Street Park is a very high priority, it is funded but over many years. Proposed Capacity Projects, page VI-26, referenced: CFP 6, development ofthe 35th Street Park; CFP 7, joint development of baseball field at Blue Heron Middle School; CFP 8, acquire parcels I I , Planning Commission Minutes October 29, 1998 Page 8 of land to secure and expand Kah Tai Lagoon Nature Park; CFP 9 acquire lots on Cherry Street. One of the things they talked about was to secure some of the existing parks the City owns, and some of the land holdings that are not presently in City ownership were protected, and became a fairly high priority. Mr. Worden: Is the sequence on those parks listed on VI-26 intended to be priority? Is the first one the highest priority? Mr. Wheeler: He said this is not what we are going to do in order 1 - 4. There is the indication, that these are priorities. Ms. Mackrow: That is why they are divided by Current and Proposed, so the Current Capacity projects were what was actually budgeted or allowed. Ms. Thayer: Wondered if anybody reading this would assume that these were in order of priority; that would be an assumption. Ms. Mackrow: The Capital Facilities list was not prioritized, except for what was already budgeted over the next 2 years, on the Current Capacity. The Proposed Capacity projects were not necessarily prioritized in this list. The reason we didn't prioritize them is often, like the 35th Street Park, there is an opportunity, and it is really important to maintain that flexibility to reflect opportunities, e.g. if there was the opportunity to do joint development with the school on baseball fields, it would come from without as opposed to being on a strict schedule. Ms. Thayer: Like in VI-25, Capital Facilities Plan Recommendations: ". . . . The projects on the CFP are prioritized only to the extent listed in the Priority Recommendations for Parks Acquisition and Development. Flexibility is an important element in the capital facilities plan. . . " Ms. Mackrow: There was a recommendation in the 1997 draft, which has now been revised, to fund wetland for open space. There was a lot of concern about the City's financial capabilities for funding that, so one of the goals in the Plan is to try to identify ways to meet a specific LOS in the most cost effective way. Mr. Boles: What consideration was given to #16 street end to using that as a pocket park in the open space inventories in section IV? That is a very popular bluff overlook, out on Cook Avenue, and a place where it is nice for young people to stand and watch the sunset, but seniors have to leave rather quickly, because they cannot stand that long. Was there any consideration given to that? It is a street end, it is closed, and assume it is a City-owned right-of-way. Ms. Mackrow: Didn't discuss specifically how the street ends could be improved in this area. What is referenced are the street ends (pointed out on the map) already analyzed and have an adopted plan, and they have not addressed how those should be improved. Mr. Boles: Similarly on the proposed dry land on Cook Avenue there, it shows the general area as dry land and a neighborhood park in the northwest quadrant; right at the trough of the hill. · · · · · · Planning Commission Minutes October 29, 1998 Page 9 Cook Avenue is currently an access point into the wetland and it fits into the trail plan but it seems to be a poor choice as a location for a pocket park as it's proposed, because it is right on a place where if the speed enforcement is not done more rigorously, it would be rather dangerous from people speeding down the hill. It seems there are other opportunities in that area. It seems like there were some mechanistic determinations made here, and not as much planning as I would have hoped. Mr. Wheeler: They had talked originally more about Elmira being a potential, but there were safety issues to that particular location. They also tried to focus on property the City actually owns so they didn't have to get into the cost of buying property. His guess is that some of those other properties within that circle might be available to the City. Mr. Worden: Table 111-4 Recreation and Pool Budget Revenue. It shows in 1995 and 1996 there was no money in the Current Expense budget for Recreation and Pool uses, and yet in the last summary at the bottom of the page it shows there was $43,000 in 1995 and $70,000 in 1996 for the sum of those two things. Was that an oversight? Mr. Wheeler: (It was suggested that the pool was owned by the County.) We had some recreation in 1995 and 1996; so there are probably some missing numbers. Ms. Erickson: Questioned the request to have the Golden Age property put in the Capital Facilities Plan, and possibly be held in reserve for the park. Mr. Wheeler: There has been some discussion by Council to not keep that as a park property. Council is working right now on a property surplus ordinance to develop criteria. There is some talk of using that to buy other pieces of property in the city, but no decision has been made on that. Mr. Welch: It has been expressed by some individual Councilmembers to make that a surplus property; it has not come through the Parks Commission or Committee. Ms. Erickson: I am not sure what we can do in this Plan about the bowling alley or roller rink since they are privately owned, unless we include a policy saying we should look into such activities. Mr. Boles: Could we put something like that in our conveyance letter to the City Council, rather than trying to word something now? Ms. Thayer: I would be amenable to that. Mr. Worden: I went through here and started to highlight all of the recommendations, and they were pretty spotty until I came to the middle of page VI-15, section 12, Priorities for Park Acquisition. From there on it was heavy with recommendations. This whole document really cries out for an executive summary. Ms. Mackrow: Last year's draft had an executive summary, but they had to revise the language · · · · I Planning Commission Minutes October 29, 1998 Page 10 in the executive summary so specifically they decided not to put it back in until the revisions are finished. Mr. Worden: One of the greatest dangers with any kind of plan is that it will be stuck on a shelf and some people will remember it, until the people change. He highly recommend they do an executive summary that really summarizes the conclusions from all the thorough data they have done, hits the highlights and then gives the recommendations in as precise a way as they can. In addition to a summary, do anything you can to emphasize the priorities that have been established and express advocacy, which he found missing; it was done in a very dry way, and he doesn't think that is the wày they feel about it. When advocacy is there it energizes people to get behind the Plan. Also, more strategies would be helpful; perhaps it is not appropriate to put them in the Plan at this point. Ms. Mackrow: Expressed appreciation for the level of detail given in the corrections. Typographical ~rrors to be corrected: Ms. Mackrow: Page numbering, etc. has not yet been finished; tables have not been renumbered. CONSENSUS: 1-6 ll-5 ll-7 ll-8 ll-9 Put numbers in the Plan in sequence, rather than according to the map sequence. City (paragraph 2) -- delete the word "our" to read: "City parks and open spaces. . ." Paragraph 3, last sentence -- Change to read: "The kitchen shelter was renovated. . ." Bell Tower -- Change to "A builQiQ,g Quilt in 1890 and histQrically us~d . . ." Paragraph 6, line 2 -- Change eastern border to western border. Larry Scott Memorial Trail -- Add commas, to read: "A section of abandoned railway grade, is bc.illg converted to a trail with terminus at the Port of Port Townsend Boat Haven, was dedicated . . . " 26. Jefferson County Fairgrounds -- Fill in data or remove. Paragraph 3 beginning with The key components, line 5 -- correct to read "community's effect" R-ll and R-14 -- delete colon at the end oftext and conclude with a period (removing the word "by" at the end ofR-14). ll-ll m-4 VI-32 Ms. Thayer: Do we need to do anything about setting a higher priority for the 35th Street Park? Ms. Erickson: The list is not prioritized. Even though it states back in the Capital Facilities Plan Recommendations this is not prioritized, could we put that in the language? This is starting a whole new section. CONSENSUS: Include in language under Proposed Capacity Projects that these are not prioritized. · · · · I Planning Commission Minutes October 29, 1998 Page 11 Mr. Boles: Those are intended to be subsections under Capital Facility Plan Recommendations? Ms. Mackrow: That is correct. Mr. Boles: It is not clear. Ms. Thayer: Suggested indicating Capital Facility Plan Recommendations -- A. Capital Facility Plan Current Capacity Projects; B. Proposed Capacity Projects. MOTION Mr. Erickson Pass the Parks, Recreation & Open Space Functional Plan on to City Council with our recommendations, corrections, additions and a letter stating the need for an executive summary and consideration of the bowling alley and roller rink SECOND Mr. Worden Discussion Ms. Thayer answered Ms. Mackrow that the bowling alley and roller rink would not be addressed in the Plan but would be conveyed in the Planning Commission's letter to the City Council Mr. Wheeler suggested making reference to them as private existing facilities within the Plan. AMENDMENT: made by Ms. Erickson and accepted by Mr. Worden Include reference to the bowling alley and roller rink in the Functional Plan under private existing facilities. VOTE Carried Unanimously, 5 in favor by roll call vote Chair Thayer said the Functional Plan would go on to City Council for an open record public hearing at a date to be announced. She thanked all participants for coming and giving their input. V. NEW BUSINESS Ms. Erickson reported she will not available for the November 12th meeting but highly recommend Ms. Thayer continue in her position as chairperson for another year. Mr. Worden reported meeting with the committee on wireless communication calling themselves "Unplugged," concerning a potential ordinance for siting of wireless communication facilities. They are just finishing the second draft of the ordinance, and the committee would like to have a joint workshop with the Planning Commission and City Council at the same time and proposed two dates, Monday, November 30th; or Wednesday, December 2nd. Mr. Worden said the ordinance comes next to the Planning Commission for recommendation, and then to City Council. The Committee would like to explain the ordinance since it was very complicated to address the impacts. Mr. Boles questioned the need for a · · · · I . . Planning Commission Minutes October 29, 1998 Page 12 workshop, when Mr. Worden could answer their questions at the time the ordinance is presented. Mr. Worden recommended that if they do not have a workshop, they have one session of review at a regular meeting with a subsequent hearing. VI. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Next Scheduled Meetings November 12. 1998 Rosewind PUDA Amendment #5 (not a hearing) Election of Officers Review of draft ordinance on wireless communications VII. ADJOURN Motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Ms. Erickson and seconded by Mr. Harbison An were in favor. The meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m. µ~ Sheila Avis, Minute Taker , , I. . . Guest List Meeting of: ~i.II~ CMl1m/~ ;;aJ~~se: 1)1 ß .¡ _ éÆ¡;.A-r/(J"'! h'lCfIO/l/IU" /k.1l ,// I Name ,.,.... .rin" I Address , I T;stimOn~? I ES I 0 I tQ'¡l'z..i~ \---()(} (~ LA~ ~ \~8_ ~c-~;> ~;- ,/ 5<:. ~tf v./rtY· IT Sit ~ ,r' 7/1- fJ) A-Pl) (AA C ORSV ~(/ '36 ýL-¡ ;;--- V , I y I ., l I I I - ---- ---