Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />April 14, 2005 <br />Page 5 of 14 <br /> <br /> <br />5.The subdivision plat shall be revised to reflect that the 10-foot utility and <br />irrigation easement along the northern property line is an exclusive easement. <br />Roll Call Vote: <br />Jeffrey Lipton Yes <br />Tom McAvinew Yes <br />Chris Pritchard Yes <br />Henry Dalton Yes <br />Michael Deborski Yes <br />Susan Loo Yes <br />Monica Sheets Yes <br />Motion passed 7:0 <br /> <br /> <br />Resolution No. 09, Series 2005, Village Shops at Colony Square <br />, an <br />amended final planned unit development (PUD) development plan to amend <br />the signage program, and make minor modifications to building architecture <br />and landscaping at Lots 1 – 4, Colony Square Subdivision. Case #05-003-FP. <br /> <br /> <br />Case Manager: Kenneth Johnstone, Principal Planner <br /> <br /> <br />Owner: Wigston Properties, LLC & MG Colony Square LLC and IPS Colony Square LLC & 1431 <br />Pearl LLP <br /> <br /> <br />Applicant and Representative: Income Property Specialist, LLC, Jack Gindi and Terri Tantum <br />Public Notice Verification: Staff reported the notice was published in the Daily Camera <br />on March 27, 2005 and mailed to the surrounding property owners and posted in the four <br />required locations on March 25, 2005. <br />Conflict of Interest and Disclosure: None. <br />Staff Report of Facts and Issues: <br />Johnstone provided the following summary: <br /> <br /> <br />An application to amend the final planned unit development (PUD) development <br />plan for the Village Shops at Colony Square in regards to their sign package. <br /> <br /> <br />The original final PUD approved in August 1999 did not address the sign program. <br />A subsequent PUD was approved in December 1999 to authorize a fairly specific <br />sign program for the project, as well as approve a special review use for several <br />restaurants. The package defined a series of sign design criteria, as well as <br />specific sign locations on each building. A small project monument sign was <br />approved at the Dillon Road entry drive. <br /> <br /> <br />Many of the sign criteria were stricter than the Commercial Development Design <br />Standards and Guidelines (CDDSG), with the intent to create a high quality <br />community image at this gateway location. <br /> <br /> <br />The owners and tenants in the project have expressed concern that the signage is <br />inadequate to provide the necessary visibility from Dillon and McCaslin. <br /> <br /> <br />In 2002 and 2003, Tokyo Joe’s Restaurant, on behalf of the ownership received <br />approval for modifications to the sign criteria that loosened the design criteria and <br />authorized a project identification (ID) sign on the plaza tower feature that faces <br />McCaslin. The project ID sign proposed to identify the project name, but not <br />individual tenants. <br /> <br />