PC 081011 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Blank stated that the downside to Option 2 is that if it were approved, it could be appealed to the City Council, whereas continuing it gives the opportunity for the applicant to get something done more quickly by working with staff on a color muting. Mr. Dolan agreed and stated that staff could discuss with the applicant whether or not the advice of the original designer is useful. He indicated that staff actually considered this and that the applicant is open to it; however, in lieu of requiring the applicant to do it, it might be better to dialogue with the applicant to see if there is interest in doing it. Commissioner Blank stated that he felt continuing the matter for two weeks would give the applicant the opportunity to decide whether he wants to come back and go through the process again formally. He added that it would be quick as a hearing has already been done. Chair Narum suggested asking the applicant. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS RE-OPENED. Chair Narum informed the applicant that the Commission can deny the application and the applicant can then appeal the decision to the City Council, approve the application with staffcontinue the item to a future meeting. Commissioner Blank added that the idea of continuing the item is so the applicant can work with staff to avoid having to return to the Commission again. Mr. Abbott noted that both options would mean working with staff and stated that his preference would be to get an approval under Option 2 and then work with staff on achieving muted colors. Chair Narum asked Mr. Abbott how he felt about putting the Bernal Corners sign back up. Mr. Abbott replied that personally he sees the balance in and the reason for it, and that as far as in making this decision, he would have no problem with calling it Bernal Corners and having separate uses there under one name. He stated, however, that he cannot say yes to that as a condition, and should the City make this a condition of approval, he would have the option of appealing it. With respect to consulting with the Dahlin Group, Mr. Abbott noted that his firm is the architect of record on the original building, although it was not his project per se. He stated that he thinks there was a loggerhead and the suggestion with the owner at that time was to bring somebody else to break the loggerhead, which was the Dahlin Group. He indicated that he had no interest in going back to the Dahlin Group architect to asking how to paint the building. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, August 10, 2011 Page 12 of 15