Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />SEPTEMBER 8, 2005 <br />Page 6 of 6 <br /> <br />Planning Commission Comments and Discussion / Direction Items for next meeting <br />McAvinew requested clarification of the phasing number per year and the difference <br />between what City Council recommended and what John Leary had recommended. <br />Johnstone stated that his understanding of City Council’s direction was to have a 250 unit <br />cap on a bi-annual basis with no more than 150 units in any one given year. He explained <br />that Leary’s calculations were based on the number of units proposed over the next 20 <br />years and dividing it by that 20 year plan and then to use that number the restrict the <br />number of units per year. <br />Sheets requested clarification on how to apply the Comp Plan with future projects and <br />how to avoid possible conflicts with current projects that might be expanding similar to <br />the Fordyce project. <br />Johnstone explained that the Fordyce project was reviewed under the HWY 42 Comp <br />Plan as well as existing entitlements from previously approved PUDs. <br />Deborski stated that the Fordyce location was looking better. <br />Lipton reminded the Commission to limit comments to possible discussion / direction <br />from staff and not future public hearing of applications that are pending. <br />Sheets inquired if the Fordyce recall would be back to the Planning Commission. <br />Lipton stated that it would be back in November, 2005. <br />McAvinew expressed concern with the signs at the former ‘Rite Aid’ site. <br />Pritchard stated that the signs had been changed to a fixture sale and was in hopes that all <br />the signs would soon be gone from that site. <br />Lipton requested that staff provide some direction to the Commission on how to proceed <br />with the process of the review of the Sign Code. <br />Johnstone asked if he had a particular area to start with, such as specifically the IDDSG <br />or the CDDSG. <br />Lipton stated that his direction would be to make it a very comprehensive review. <br />Lipton inquired of Commissioner’s availability for the October 13 meeting. He stated that <br />he might not be able to attend. All others indicated they would be attending. <br />Adjourn <br /> <br />Pritchard moved and Deborski seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting. Lipton <br />adjourned the meeting at 6:58 PM. <br />