My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Minutes 2005 11 10
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2000-2019 Planning Commission
>
2005 Planning Commission Minutes
>
Planning Commission Minutes 2005 11 10
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 9:55:16 AM
Creation date
9/10/2014 3:21:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
PCMIN 2005 11 10
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />NOVEMBER 10, 2005 <br />Page 3 of 12 <br /> <br />Council itself requests a call up of the previously approved PUD and/or <br />SRU. <br />Commission Questions of Staff: <br />Deborski asked if the applicant had entered into a parking agreement with the property <br />owner to the west because he has observed no cars parked out of compliance. <br />Wood stated he had no communications from the applicant stating that a parking <br />agreement had been reached. <br />Applicant Presentation: No applicant present. <br />Commission Questions of Applicant: No applicant present. <br />Members of the Public: None heard. <br />Commission Questions of Staff and Applicant: None heard. <br />Public Hearing Closed / Commission Comments: <br />Pritchard noted that the applicant has made an effort to be in compliance. <br />McAvinew agreed that the applicant has demonstrated his ability to be in compliance. <br />Sheets ask if the applicant should become non-compliant, then what would be the process <br />or procedure. Wood explained that another recall could be initiated that would be based <br />on the newly approved PUD/SRU. <br />McAvinew moved and Pritchard seconded a motion that since the applicant demonstrated <br />the ability to comply with the existing approved PUD/SRU and in view that the City <br />Council Resolution No. 35, Series 2005 amended the PUD, the Planning Commission <br />recommends that no further action be taken at this time. <br />Roll Call Vote: <br /> <br />Name Vote <br />Jeff Lipton Excused <br />Tom McAvinew Yes <br />Chris Pritchard Yes <br />Susan Loo Yes <br />Michael Deborski Yes <br />Monica Sheets Yes <br />Hank Dalton Excused <br />Motion passed: 5:0 (Lipton and Dalton excused) <br /> <br /> <br />Resolution No. 23, Series 2005, Carrabba’s Italian Grill, Inc., <br />a request for <br />an amended final PUD development plan to increase the sign area for each of <br />three existing signs by approximately 12 SF to include the wording “Lunch <br /> <br />Dinner” in 12-inch letters below the logo.575 McCaslin Blvd. Case #05-022- <br />PS. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Applicant and Owner: Carrabba’s Italian Grill Inc. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Representative: Young Electric Sign Co, (Rick Bellefeuille) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Case Manager: Kenneth Johnstone, Principal Planner <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.