Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mr. Keim stated that they have constructed a phasing plan for construction of the two roads. They <br />will be submitting it to the City soon and feel that it will work well for all involved. <br /> <br />Commission Questions: <br /> <br />Lipton asked what the Staff’s thinking of removing the monument sign for the Comfort Inn. <br /> <br />Ranu stated that city code does not allow for off-site monument signs. It also sets a dangerous <br />precedent. <br /> <br />Lipton asked if they can approve the off-site sign. <br /> <br />Ranu stated that through the PUD process there can be exceptions granted to the zoning code when <br />the intent of the PUD code is met that there be some benefit to the city that there be an exception <br />granted to the code. Ranu asked that the applicant to express that benefit to the city. <br /> <br />Lipton asked if Staff thinks that the existing wall mounted sign on Comfort Inn is adequate. <br /> <br />Ranu thinks that once you turn on Dillon Road that it is. Comfort Inn is located upward to 600 feet <br />from McCaslin and is kind of far from the McCaslin Blvd. <br /> <br />Chairman Boulet likes the project and would like to see the 23 conditions worked out before he can <br />approve it. He would like to see a draft of the type of restaurants that can appear on this site. <br />Signage on the McCaslin side, if it is tasteful, he would support. He would like to see the signage <br />detail on a final. As far as the setbacks go, he would be willing to waive in the context of the entire <br />development. As for the access to the Comfort Inn, he would like to see a final resolution to that <br />matter. Signage for the Comfort Inn, he would approve of a monument sign for the Comfort Inn on <br />Dillon Road. He understands the staff’s concerns, but this is a unitary development. <br /> <br />Chairman Boulet would support any motion to continue this and to get a resolved plan before the <br />Planning Commission to send on to the City Council. <br /> <br />Mr. Stratton is concerned about loosing his financing if they do not get approval at this meeting. <br />There are many contingencies that have been responded to and resolved which have not been taken <br />off of the resolution. With no exception do they take issue to any of the conditions that are asked to <br />be put upon them. They believe that they have complied to all of the issues. <br /> <br />Mr. Wood addressed the Planning Commission with regard to a summarization of the resolution in <br />respect to recent meetings with the applicant. Mr. Wood went through all of the tracking items <br />which were also conditions of approval that have been addressed by the applicant. <br /> <br />Condition No. 20 is truly an issue on the signage as the Comfort Inn has expressed. The photometric <br />plan does need to be revised before going to City Council on August 3. <br /> <br />A lot of these are matters that have already been addressed. The city will treat this as a one-phase <br />plan for the purpose of obligating the developer for public improvements. <br /> <br /> 5 <br /> <br />