PC 071311 - Laserfiche WebLink

receive and provide rehabilitation to about 40 people a month. He added that they sometimes have up to six beds available on one day, then are full the next. He indicated that occupancy has not been dropping down to the 129 mark, and they have a two-year waiting list which is unfortunate. Commissioner Pearce referred to the issue of 180 days versus 90 days and asked Mr. Olds if he is amenable to extending the timeframe only for the parking lot reconfiguration, leaving the other improvements at 90 days. Mr. Olds replied that he was. Commissioner Blank inquired if this timeframe would include the signage. Ms. Soo replied that the timeline for the sign is outlined in Condition No. 5 of Exhibit A-2, which states that within 14 days of the approval becoming effective, the applicant must submit the sign application and, once approved, must be installed within 30 days. Chair Narum inquired if the sign must go through the Design Review process. Ms. Soo said yes. Commissioner Blank thanked Mr. Olds for his patience and for working with the neighbors to create a viable solution. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Blank moved to make the required Conditional Use findings as listed in the staff report and to approve Case PCUP-185/P11-0043, subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit A-1 for the Conditional Use Permit and Exhibit A-2 for the Design Review, with a modification to Condition No. 7 as shown in the staff memorandum dated July 13, 2011, with the exception that the 180-day extension shall apply only to the parking lot reconfiguration, and 90 days shall remain for all the other improvements; the sign will comply with Condition No. 5. Commissioner Pentin seconded the motion. Commissioner Olson stated for the record that based upon public testimony provided, he supported any request for and strongly encouraged the City, the City Council, and the Commission to entertain any future application for additional beds in this facility. Chair Narum agreed. She added that she was pleased to see the application return the way it did and thanked the applicant for working with the neighbors. She noted that the fact that the neighbors are not in attendance raising issues is a real plus to the application. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, July 13, 2011 Page 19 of 21