Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />City Council <br />February 28, 1990 <br />was not included initially. Boosalis stated that after <br />discussions with the Council on the development of the <br />entire area, his firm included the Steneroden property. <br />However, if that property had not been included, the <br />Rice At C Center would still have been allowed two <br />pylon signs under the Planner's interpretation of the <br />ordinance, and if the Steneroden property had developed <br />independently, that property would have been allowed a <br />pylon sign. <br />Boosalis pointed out the importance of signage to <br />businesses. Boosalis also reported that when <br />development plans were submitted for the second phase <br />of the center, those plans showed a pylon sign for the <br />second phase as well as a pylon sign for Rapid oil, in <br />addition to the already existing pylon at the first <br />phase of the shopping center. Boosalis felt that given <br />the frontage the center has on Rice Street, three <br />pylons for three buildinqs was not unreasonable. <br />Fahey pointed out that the property occupied by Rapid <br />Oil is not a separate lot from the second phase of the <br />shopping center. Fahey felt Boosalis's arguments would <br />be more compelling if the Rapid Oil site had its own <br />legal description. <br />Collova asked if both phases of the shopping center <br />were handled under one PUD Agreement. <br />The City Planner responded that they were since the <br />second phase of the shopping center was handled as an <br />amendment to the PUD Agreement for the first phase. <br />Boosalis responded that had he known the effect on his <br />signage, he would have requested separate PUD <br />agreements for each building. <br />The City Planner reported that it is true that Boosalis <br />could have had a separate lot for the Rapid Oil site, <br />however, it is his interpretation that Rapid Oil is <br />physically part of the shopping center since it shares <br />access, parking, and other physical aspects of the <br />center. <br />Fahey stated that he does not have any major concern <br />regarding a separate pylon for Rapid oil, and had Rapid <br />Oil been on a separate parcel, he would have voted to <br />approve a pylon for that buildinq or would have agreed <br />to the pylon when the PUD Agreement was negotiated. <br />However, Fahey stated that he was against the variance <br />Page 3 <br />