PC 102302 - Laserfiche WebLink

r He noted that the Planning Commission may decide on the issue of the windows, and added that staff and the PDA could work with the applicant regarding the color selection. Commissioner Sullivan noted that he may not have enough information to make a good decision, and added that the Planning Commission's task was to fulfill the public process, not to get the applicant's business started. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS REOPENED. Mr. Tehrani noted that he would like to open his business, and that he had been waiting for a while. In response to an inquiry by Chairperson Maas, Mr. Tehrani would like to have the windows lengthened, and agreed with the Commission's request for a color rendering. He noted that he had already hired staff and was nearly ready to open. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Mr. Iserson noted that staff is comfortable that all of the details of windows have been provided. He noted that although a color rendering had not been provided, they were separate issues. He stated that staff could return to the Planning Commission regarding the color renderings and the Commission could take action on the colors, awnings, and sign. r Commissioner Roberts agreed with the PDA's recommendation to lower the windows, and believed they would be attractive. She would like to see color renderings before any decision made on color. Chairperson Maas requested staff to work with the applicant regarding the colors and the awning design, and return to the Planning Commission for approval. Commissioner Roberts moved to approve Case PDR-244 for the window modifications only, as recommended by staff with the following modifications: . The neon banding will be deleted from the plan. . The color of the awning and building colors will be addressed by staff and the applicant, and a color rendering is to be brought before the Planning Commission for approval. . The design of the sign and alternative lighting scheme would be examined by staff, and brought to the Planning Commission for final approval. Chairperson Maas seconded the motion. Commissioner Sullivan noted that the design would look attractive and historic, but he was not convinced that was a legitimate tradeoff for the historical integrity of the building. /" Commissioner Roberts recalled the Mr. Huffs opinion that the windows would not affect the structural integrity of the building. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 23,2002 Page 25