Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />DECEMBER 11, 2003 <br />REVIEW Tacheny agreed that the sign plan has been changed, but noted that the <br />TACI3ENY only change is the color of the sign. The size and location of the sign <br />TOWNOrRICES as originally proposed remains the same. The sign is proposed to be 10 <br />feet wide by 14 feet high. <br />Barraclough asked about the time and temperature element on the sign. <br />Tacheny reported that the time and temperature flips over and does not <br />blink. The City Planner indicated that that was acceptable. <br />Keis asked why the time and temperature feature is being added to the <br />sign. Tacheny indicated that it was their thought that this feature would <br />draw more attention to the sign and consequently to the office park. <br />Tacheny indicated that the sign would comply with the recommendations <br />of the City Planner as outlined in his report. <br />The Planner noted that in addition to architectural review for the <br />monument sign, the Commission is being asked to approve a <br />comprehensive sign plan for the office park. That plan includes plaque <br />signage adjacent to the entry doors for each business, similar to the <br />signage at Blacktern. There will also be address numbers on each of the <br />units. <br />Duray recommended approval of the Comprehensive Sign Plan for <br />Tacheny Professional Park as well as Architectural Review for the <br />monument sign subject to compliaatce with the recommendations of the <br />City Planner. <br />Motion seconded by Weihe. <br />Motion carried 6 - 0. <br />AMEND The City Planner presented the Commission with a proposed Zoning Code <br />ZONING amendment that separates the Variance process and the Appeals <br />CODE process. The Planner pointed out that currently these two zoning actions <br />RELATIVE are combined within the Zoning Code, which has been problematic. The <br />TO proposed amendment retains the existing language for the Variance <br />APPEALING process, but clarifies the Appeals process as well as establishes a deadline <br />ZONING by which appeals must be files. The current language establishes no such <br />DECISIONS deadline, therefore as an example, an appeal could be filed six months <br /> after a zoning action and after a project has already been constructed. <br />The P(amrer also noted that the ordinance amendment provides a Council <br />vote requirement of 2/3rds vote in support of an appeal. The Planner <br />-3- <br />