Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2021 11 11

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 14, 2021 Page 6 of 9 Hoefner stated that this was a great amenity and that he was not concerned that they would be at capacity. He stated that staff was better equipped to figure out landscaping details but the condition as written made sense. Diehl emphasized the rural gateway language and noted that the orientation of the building was more for business and not for standards. Howe felt that the architecture met the rural feel and was appealing. He noted that there could be a lot of landscaping in the setback and he stated that he did not think trees would provide a buffer about six or seven feet. He suggested that they could play with the grade of that ground and that hardscape could be appropriate, but he did not want to be too specific. Overall, he stated that it flowed well with traffic and he was in support. Williams stated that staff and the landscape architect could work together to create something in the spirit of the condition. Moline voiced appreciation for Commissioner Diehl's comments and offered an explanation of his own that he felt that a 50-55' foot buffer was the area that helped provide the space to give the site that rural character and therefore he was comfortable supporting the proposal even though the application itself did not bring the same rural buffer. He noted that the GDP approval addressed the rural gateway planning for the site overall. Diehl asked for more consideration of the SRU after the GDP process, when they put a lot of thought into the uses. He noted that South Boulder Road also had a lot of car - oriented uses. Brauneis stated that he had been concerned with that early on, and noted that rural did not bring to mind any kind of commercial development. But rural here had more meanings in different contexts and it was not the pastoral definition anymore. He did not think that car -oriented businesses were much different than other types of development because they both required parking and hardscape. He wanted to let staff work with the applicant on the landscaping regarding maturity, caliper, and species, and noted that the reality was that on day one they would not have mature trees in any development. Hoefner moved to approve Resolution 14, Series 2021 with the condition as drafted by staff. Moline seconded. Motion approved 5-1 by roll call vote, with Commissioner Diehl voting nay. McDonalds PUD Amendment: A request for approval of a Planned Unit Development Amendment to allow minor site modifications and signage changes. (Resolution No. 15, Series 2021). REQUEST TO CONTINUE TO NOVEMBER 11, 2021 • Applicant: Tiffany Roth, Rogue Architects • Case Planner: Ellie Hassan, Planner II Diehl made a motion to continue the hearing on Resolution 15, Series 2021 to a date certain on November 11, 2021. Howe seconded. Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote.