My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03/14/2011
Clerk
>
Minutes
>
Planning Commission
>
2011
>
03/14/2011
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/3/2012 12:57:04 PM
Creation date
3/30/2011 10:15:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PBA
Doc Type
Minutes
Doc #
Minutes
Date
3/14/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Executive Director Trevino commented that the proposed wall sign design was <br />responsive to the Commission's previous direction in that it no longer contained the <br />standard Courtyard by Marriott red/green logo. <br />Rob Eres, representing the applicant, recapped his understanding of the Planning <br />Commission's prior direction and explained why he thought the proposed design met <br />the intent of previous discussions. Mr. Eres stressed the need to have the signs <br />approved in order to meet the May 15, 2011 opening date. <br />Corey Alder, representing the applicant, stated that the sign as proposed had not <br />changed from the signs that were included on previous elevations and that the <br />purpose of the variance request was to allow a larger number of signs rather than to <br />approve a specific design. He too stressed that a delay in approval would be a <br />hardship to the developer. <br />The public hearing was opened. No public members spoke. The public hearing was <br />closed. <br />The Commission continued to discuss the merits of the proposed signage with <br />Commissioners Alderete, Mill, Turner and Yrarrazaval finding that the sign was not <br />responsive to the Commissioners' previous direction nor was it reflective of what the <br />developer had previously promised. Commissioners Acosta, Gartner and Nalle <br />found that the sign design was adequate. Commissioners Acosta and Nalle <br />acknowledged that they had not been on the Planning Commission when the signs <br />were previously discussed. <br />MOTION: Adopt a resolution approving Variance No. 2011-02 as conditioned. <br />Moved by Commissioner Nalle and Seconded by Vice Chairman Gartner. <br />Motion failed due to a lack of vote. <br />SUBSTITUE MOTION: Continue to March 28, 2011 to consider alternative designs <br />and images. <br />MOTION: Yrarrazaval SECOND: Turner <br />VOTE: AYES: Alderete, Mill, Turner, Yrarrazaval (4) <br />NOES: Acosta, Gartner, Nalle (3) <br />ABSTAIN: None (0) <br />ABSENT: None (0) <br />2. AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2005-02. CONDITIONAL <br />USE PERMIT NO. 2011-05. VARIANCE NO. 2011-04. AND SITE PLAN REVIEW <br />NO. 2011-01 <br />Filed by Bill McKibbin, to allow a 300-unit multiple family residential development at <br />100-140 East MacArthur Boulevard located in the Specific Development No. 76 (SD- <br />76) zoning district. <br />PUBLISHED IN THE ORANGE COUNTY REPORTER: March 2, 2011 <br />PUBLICLY NOTICED: March 2, 2011 <br />RECOMMENDATION: <br />Recommend that the City Council: <br />1. Adopt a resolution approving the Addendum to the Final Environmental <br />Impact Report No. 2004-02 and approve the Mitigation Monitoring and <br />Reporting Program. <br />2. Adopt an ordinance approving the fourth amendment to Development <br />Agreement No. 2005-02. <br />3. Adopt a ` ,resolution approving Conditional Use Permit No 2011-05 as <br />conditioned. <br />Planning Commission Minutes 3 March 14, 2011 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.