Laserfiche WebLink
Guidelines. He expressed support for the proposal and agreed that the landscaping helps <br />screen the doors. <br /> <br />Sisk asked Wood for clarification that the revised plans were received yesterday, <br />December 20. <br /> <br />Wood replied, yes. He stated that ongoing discussions regarding the project were also <br />held between Ken Johnstone and Bob Maddox. <br /> <br />Sisk asked Wood for the date that City staff received the plans for the building. <br /> <br />Johnstone replied December 9, 1999. <br /> <br />Sisk asked for clarification that plans containing the revised articulation were received on <br />December 9, 1999. <br /> <br />Johnstone and Wood replied that the plans containing the revised articulation were <br />received on December 20, 1999. <br /> <br />Sisk asked for clarification that the mm-around time for staff was twelve days on one <br />proposal and one day on the other proposal. He expressed concern that if City Council <br />approves the plan, they would be rewarding the applicant for proposing a building with <br />twenty-five conditions of approval that does not meet the Industrial Development Design <br />Standards & Guidelines. <br /> <br />Howard explained that the reasonable thing for City Council to do is to remand the <br />project back for the Planning Commission to review at their January 11, 2000 meeting <br />and then have the project presented for City Council's review at the January 18, 2000 <br />City Council meeting. <br /> <br />Davidson moved that Council return the project to the Planning Commission for their <br />review, seconded by Sisk. <br /> <br />Keany asked Light if the project could be continued until the January 18, 2000 City <br />Council meeting to insure the applicant that this project will be reviewed on that date. <br /> <br />Light replied that it must be referred back to the Planning Commission. He explained that <br />even though the only change involves architecture, the Planning Commission needs to <br />hold another hearing on the proposal. <br /> <br />Keany urged staff and Planning Commission to schedule the project for City Council's <br />review at the January 18, 2000 regular City Council meeting. <br /> <br />Mayer stated that he did not think the project would require extensive review by the <br />Planning Commission. <br /> <br />16 <br /> <br /> <br />