Laserfiche WebLink
In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Blank on whether the Commission would be locked <br />into this decision if the applicant were to be 100 percent compliant, Ms. Decker noted that she <br />would confer with Ms. Nerland during the recess. <br /> <br />The Planning Commission recessed for a break at 10:26 p.m. <br /> <br />Chairperson Maas reconvened the meeting at 10:41 p.m. <br /> <br />Ms. Nerland explained the rationale behind the presentation of this item as a conditional use <br />permit and design review, noting that the function of the conditional use permit was to state that <br />the currently conditioned and allowed uses may occur in whatever spaces approved by the <br />Planning Commission. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank requested an amendment to the motion to limit the location and <br />operation of the proposed use to Phase 1 and to add the following language to the <br />condition: "Separate Planning Commission approvals shall be required for design review <br />approvals for future expansions as well as a conditional use permit modification if <br />additional uses or significant expansion of uses are proposed with Phases 2 or 3." <br /> <br />Commissioners Fox and Arkin accepted the amendment as proposed. <br /> <br />ROLL CALL VOTE: <br /> <br />AYES: Commissioners Arkin, Blank, Fox, Maas and Roberts. <br />NOES: None. <br />ABSTAiN: None. <br />RECUSED: None. <br />ABSENT: None. <br /> <br /> Resolution No. PC-2005-19 was entered and adopted as motioned. <br /> <br /> EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, May 11,2005 Page 5 of ~ <br /> <br /> <br />