Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes <br />2/28/89 <br /> <br />The Commissioners discussed the building appearance and it was the <br />concensus that they would like to see brick columns and architectural <br />panels on the south side of the building also. <br /> <br />COMMISSIONER JOHNSON MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL rOR <br />A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST BY TLC. INC. TO EXPAND THE EXISTING <br />DAYCARE FACILITY WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS:, <br /> <br />1 . THAT THE ENTIRE PLAY AREA BE FENCED. <br /> <br />2. PROVIDE FOURTEEN (14) OFF STREET PARKING STALLS AS SHOWN ON 'l'H1 SITI <br />PLAN. THESE STALLS SHALL BE HARDSURFACED AND DUST FREE. INDIVIDUAL <br />STALLS SHALL ALSO BE STRIPED. <br /> <br />3. THAT THE PROPOSED BUILDING BE DECORATED WITH FOUR BRICK COLUMNS AND <br />ARCHITECTURAL PANELS TO MATCH THE ORIGINAL BUILDING. <br /> <br />4. THAT THE DUMPSTER BE SCREENED AND A LATCHABLE GATE BE INSTALLED. <br /> <br />5. THAT THE SIGNAGE FOR THE DAYCARE BE RESTRICTED TO TWO (2) SIGNS NOT <br />TO EXCEED 32 SQ. FT. FOR EITHER SIGN. <br /> <br />6. THAT THE OWNER W01U< WITH STAFF TO SOLVE THE DRIVE THROUGH PROBLEM. <br /> <br />7. <br /> <br />CONTINUE THE BRICK COLUMNS AND ARCHITECTURAL PANELS ON THE SOUTH <br />SIDE OF THE BUILDING. <br /> <br />8. <br /> <br />THAT THE LANDSCAPING BE CONTINUED WITH MORE MATURE TREES. <br /> <br />COMMI SSIONER MORTON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0. <br /> <br />7, Signage Variance Request by Security Financial/Public Hearing <br /> <br />Steve Bjork, Zoning Assistant, gave an update on Security Financial's <br />signage. He explained the new request before the Planning Commission <br />is to remove the existing sign face (105 sq. ft) and replace it with a 3 <br />ft. by 17 ft. message identification center and a 3-1/3 ft. by 17 ft. <br />identification sign (111 sq. ft.) The applicant is also proposing to <br />reduce the existing pylon structure to 20 ft. At the December 1988 <br />Planning Commission meeting they reviewed this request and recommended <br />denial as they did not want to set a precedence in allowing a larger sign <br />than that specified by the ordinance. The new request is to make the <br />freestanding sign conforming in regards to height, yet maintain the <br />nonconforming size of the sign face. <br /> <br />4. <br />