Laserfiche WebLink
<br />review period but they are assuming that administrative review will be a quicker process than the <br />current format. He stated that they are recommending that the fees remain the same in case the <br />plans need further review or to come back to the Planning Commission. <br /> <br />Citizen Input <br /> <br />There was none. <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Nixt, seconded by Chair Pro Tern Van Scoy, to close the public <br />hearing. <br /> <br />Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Chair Pro Tern Van Scoy, Commissioners Nixt, Brauer, <br />Cleveland, and Rogers. Voting No: None. Absent: Commissioners Hunt and Levine. <br /> <br />The public hearing closed at 7:19 p.m. <br /> <br />Commission Business <br /> <br />Chair Pro Tern Van Scoy asked if the intent of this amendment is to save the applicants money. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Gladhill stated that it the purpose is to make the process of expanding their <br />businesses easier. <br /> <br />Commissioner VanScoy stated that this is an attempt to reduce bureaucracy <br /> <br />Associate Planner Gladhill stated that he agreed and noted that they anticipate that this process <br />will take only 30 days versus the 60 days that is currently seen. <br /> <br />Commissioner Cleveland asked if other cities are doing it this way and noted that she couldn't <br />find any local cities that handle these administratively. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Gladhill stated that he doesn't have specific examples. <br /> <br />Commissioner Cleveland stated that she is concerned about transparency, but appreciates that <br />staff is trying to streamline the process. She suggested including information in staff updates, so <br />something is. in writing, people are being kept info~ed and it is transparent. She stated that she <br />would also like to see this information forwarded to the Council. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Miller noted that this can also be included in the Weekly <br />Update for the Council. <br /> <br />Chair Pro Tern Van Scoy asked if under the new proposal whether these will still go before the <br />Council. <br /> <br />Planning CommissionlMarch 5, 2009 <br />Page 3 of 12 <br />