PDF Format:

ApprovedPlanningCommissionMeeting.9.19.16.pdfApprovedPlanningCommissionMeeting.9.19.16.pdf


CITY OF SHAWNEE

PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING

MINUTES

September 19, 2016

7:30 P.M.


PLANNING COMMISSIONERS PRESENTSTAFF PRESENT
Commissioner Augie BoginaPlanning Director Paul Chaffee
Commissioner Bruce BienhoffDeputy Planning Director Doug Allmon
Commissioner Randy BraleyPlanner Mark Zielsdorf
Commissioner Dennis BusbyAdministrative Assistant Angie Lind
Commissioner Rusty Mudgett
Commissioner Kathy Peterson
Commissioner John Smith
Commissioner Alan Willoughby
Commissioner Steven Wise
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ABSENT
Commissioner Les Smith
CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Welcome to the September 19, 2016 meeting of the Shawnee Planning Commission. We’ll start with Roll Call.

A. ROLL CALL

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Commissioner Braley.

COMMISSIONER BRALEY: Present.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Commissioner John Smith.

COMMISSIONER JOHN SMITH: Present.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Commissioner Peterson.

COMMISSIONER PETERSON: Here.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Commissioner Willoughby is coming in the door, so we’ll call him present.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Commissioner Bienhoff.

COMMISSIONER BIENHOFF: Here.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Commissioner Busby is here.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Commissioner Bogina.

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: Here.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Commissioner Wise.

COMMISSIONER WISE: Here.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Commissioner Les Smith is absent.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Commissioner Mudgett.

COMMISSIONER MUDGETT: Present.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Thank you. Commissioner Bogina, would you lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance?

B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

C. CONSENT ITEMS

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: The Consent Agenda, items 1 and 2 are listed under the Consent Items Agenda. Unless there is a request to remove an item from the Consent Agenda, the items will be approved in one motion. Is there a request to remove an item from the Consent Agenda? If not, is there a motion to approve the Consent Agenda? Commissioner Willoughby.

COMMISSIONER WILLOUGHBY: I move for approval of the Consent Agenda as presented.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Mr. Braley, is there a second?

COMMISSIONER BRALEY: Second.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: All in favor say aye.

COMMISSIONERS: Aye.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Opposed nay? Motion carried, thank you.


(Motion passed 9-0; Les Smith absent)

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: In Unfinished Business:

D. UNFINISHED BUSINESS


CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Doug.

DEPUTY PLANNING DIRECTOR ALLMON: The building that’s in question tonight fronts the intersection of the Shawnee Mission Parkway frontage road and Bluejacket (Street.) The building was constructed in 1948, and the exterior was last remodeled in the early 2000’s. This remodel included facing the lower portion of the building with terracotta red Cherokee brick, and construction of a stucco parapet above. The stucco parapet was painted light cream.

Staff recently was contacted by the building owner and subsequently granted administrative approval to repaint the upper parapet. Since then, the parapet wall has been colored light green. This is very similar to the green used on the Panera building and the McAlister’s Deli that are both located in the general vicinity. As part of the discussion, the owner also expressed a desire to install glass mosaic tile at the northeast corner of the roof parapet, and this does require Planning Commission review and approval.

The glass mosaic tile sheet is composed of ½ inch individual glass squares in a combination of blues, greens, and yellows. The owner would also frame the mosaic tile edges with subway-style glass tile in a cobalt blue color, and glass bullnose tile in a light-green color. The Planning Commission needs to determine if the use of colored glass tile is appropriate as a parapet accent at the curved northeast corner of the parapet wall. Samples of the materials have been laid up there on the counter for you as well. This is staff’s attempt to mock up what it would look like. Obviously, the tile is not to scale so the glass tiles themselves would be much smaller in perspective.

In terms of a recommendation, the Planning Commission shall determine if the use of glass mosaic tile is an acceptable, is acceptable as an accent on the building’s parapet wall at the curved northeast corner. If the Commission decides the glass tile is not appropriate, the unpainted portion of the northeast parapet wall shall be painted light green to match the rest of the building.

That completes our report.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Thank you, Doug. Is the applicant present? Would you please come forward and state your name and address please?

APPLICANT: I’m Nicholas Abnos.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Are you in agreement with staff recommendations? On this, or I guess Planning Commission recommendation…

MR. ABNOS: (Inaudible) Go ahead, sir.

(Inaudible)

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Thank you. Does the Commission have any questions for the staff or applicant? Commissioner Bienhoff.

COMMISSIONER BIENHOFF: Yes, a question for the applicant. Is the intent to cover the entire rounded portion of that with a…

MR. ABNOS: It’s a space of about 12’ x 14’ high.

COMMISSIONER BIENHOFF: Okay. And what is the expected life of the covering?

MR. ABNOS: It’s my understanding, the architect opinion is that it would be for a long time. It’s not temporary.

COMMISSIONER BIENHOFF: Okay.

MR. ABNOS: (Inaudible) It will be, it will give them a little bit of accent, it will give it a little bit of accent, a little bit more of a protection I would call it, that’s all.

COMMISSIONER BIENHOFF: And Doug, do you have any insight on the life expectancy?

DEPUTY PLANNING DIRECTOR ALLMON: I do not.

MR. ABNOS: I don’t believe there is any…it’s a very permanent…as you can see the sample is in front of you; the grout goes in between all ½ inch square pieces and it would not be shiny, I wouldn’t like to have something very bright and yucky obviously; it’s very subdued but yet (inaudible) gives it the liberty, you know, life on that corner. That has a good feature to the shopping center on that corner, the L-shape center; so, I think this would look very good. The architect believes the same. I’m very conservative. I like to do everything cream or black or that kind of a look. I hired someone who is an architect and also his firm is probably in Kansas City, better known firm in (Inaudible) for, you know, shopping centers and commercial buildings and historic buildings. The name of his company is Color by Distinction (Touch of Distinction); he’s well known in Kansas City; I hired him to come up with the colors he chose was a little too far, too much…I felt it was too much for the thing; it wasn’t simple enough it seemed, so I chose this one color for the whole thing; but, this corner needs a little bit of life, so that’s what we decided to do.

COMMISSIONER BIENHOFF: Thank you.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Commissioner Wise.

COMMISSIONER WISE: Question and this is probably for the applicant. So, you’ve got a curved façade and my understanding is that the bullnose, the subway tile and the bullnose, are those going to be the border around this top piece?

MR. ABNOS: Yes, sir. It would be up to down on the top, it would go out, it picks up the color on that’s in the center and I think it will look really pretty. I do on some other job, looks beautiful actually.

COMMISSIONER WISE: So, yeah it would in other words, picture frame…

MR. ABNOS: Yes, sir.

COMMISSIONER WISE: All of the way around.

MR. ABNOS: Pretty much, yes sir.

COMMISSIONER WISE: Okay. My only concern would be just knowing that when this goes around a curve it’s going to look a little bit segmented on that tight of a radius, so just keep that in mind.

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: Mr. Chairman?

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Commissioner Bogina.

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: I believe the style of your building started out to be traditional and then you’ve added other elements of the awning and the lighting to make it more eclectic.

MR. ABNOS: I did.

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: How do you think that this particular feature promotes any style that you have going on…(Inaudible)

MR. ABNOS: (Inaudible)

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: How do you think…

MR. ABNOS: I think it looks very nice.

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: How do you think…

MR. ABNOS: How I think?

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: How do you think, how does this complement what you have now?

MR. ABNOS: It actually quite complements it because a. I have light fixtures that you can see one of them…

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: Yes, very contemporary.

MR. ABNOS: Contemporary.

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: Yes, very contemporary.

MR. ABNOS: And the light fixtures that are installed on the wall, the wall light fixtures are also very contemporary. The awning that I did…it was a dead center, if you forgot what it used to look like…

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: It’s an open awning, yes.

MR. ABNOS: Open awning. I installed a very, I don’t know if I have a picture…Mr. Allmon, do you have any pictures of the awnings?

DEPUTY PLANNING DIRECTOR ALLMON: I do not.

MR. ABNOS: Everything goes together very well. It’s not the first thing I’ve done. And it looks very nice. It’s good, very good for the center.

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: Okay. So do you think that this, you think that your center is contemporary looking right now and this is contemporary looking, you think?

MR. ABNOS: You can call it contemporary. Pretty much like the building across the street, the bank across the street that is (Inaudible) across the street. It’s pretty much the same thing. When I decided to do renovation of the center was because I noticed there going to be building an office building across the street…

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: I’m sorry, what?

MR. ABNOS: I noticed there’s can be an office building built across the street.

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: Yes.

MR. ABNOS: And there are gonna be more money spent to doing a lot of project. At the same time QuikTrip going in next door and that would add on a little bit more life to that area. So I thought, okay, I spent some, I do my share of it so I can make my center look a little bit more nicer.

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: And why do you think it doesn’t look nice right now with the beige?

MR. ABNOS: It looks okay…

(Inaudible)

MR. ABNOS: This will look better. This will definitely look (Inaudible). Even on the picture it doesn’t look that bad. Even though that’s not…

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: It’s just a little bit, it’s not a reflection of the whole thing.

MR. ABNOS: Of course. Of course.

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: What do you think this is maybe a 2 x 4 section of 12 x 14? So, it’s only about 10% of the…

MR. ABNOS: Could be.

(Inaudible)

MR. ABNOS: Could be. The samples are in front of you. You can see the grout goes in between, it’s not gonna be shiny like obnoxious shiny.

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: So, it’s intended to attract attention?

MR. ABNOS: I would say any façade you give to a shopping center is intended to draw attention to it, of course. So, it’s not any different than everything else we do. That trim on the top, that sheet metal on the top…

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: Coping.

MR. ABNOS: Coping, that’s also intent to cover…

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: As an accent.

MR. ABNOS: And also an accent, yeah, that’s right. It will look very nice I think.

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: All right, thank you.

MR. ABNOS: You’re welcome.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Any other questions for staff or the applicant? Commissioner Peterson.

COMMISSIONER PETERSON: I understand that this is a rendering and the tile will be, that’s not scale, but is that the size of the Mosaic? No, no, no. I’m talking about that much of the wall.

MR. ABNOS: No, madam, it goes around into a corner. So roughly about 14 foot by probably 14 or 15 foot.

COMMISSIONER PETERSON: And this is on the northeast corner only?

MR. ABNOS: There’s only to the center because there’s the L-shape…

COMMISSIONER PETERSON: Yes.

MR. ABNOS: Right here is where the L-shape is. That will make it a little bit more appealing.

COMMISSIONER PETERSON: Thank you.

MR. ABNOS: You’re welcome.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: I have a question for you that is, if this is put up are you adding a lot of lighting to this feature?

MR. ABNOS: No, that’s it. (Inaudible) I’m not going to add any more lighting. No, we have already pole lightings and that’s the story behind the pole lighting. I bought pole lightings, very, very expensive, installed them around it and then we had the issue with it downstairs and in the end we decided to abandon the project (Inaudible).

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Very fine, thank you. I guess this point in time we’d be in Commission discussion.

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: Mr. Chairman?

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Commissioner Bogina.

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: And, I do agree with Steve, if this is a rounded surface and I don’t know if we got a good explanation or not; as you try to install a flat breakable surface or glass tile around that surface, I don’t know if we are going to get a kind of finished look that we might have expected.

MR. ABNOS: May I suggest something to you?

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: No, not at the moment, sir.

MR. ABNOS: Okay.

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: And so I think it’s gonna be very hard installation I think you do, but Steve may no more than us, your flat tile may be the same thing as you’re going around the contour as to how your gonna access and have it turn out well. Just my opinion from my tiling days. Unless Steve has something different.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Commissioner Wise.

COMMISSIONER WISE: Yeah, I would agree. I think it comes down to the installation and some people can do it successfully, but that’s a fairly tight radius; and you’ve also got, there’s going to be the detail of the bull nose against that coping as well that’s going to have to be figured out, so getting the right contractor is what it comes down to, to making that successful across that surface.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Commissioner Braley.

COMMISSIONER BRALEY: Yeah, I would agree with everything that’s been said so far, as far as the concern of the execution of the idea for sure. The other thing that I’m struggling with is not having a broader picture of the center, sort of scale that element as it relates to the whole center and to be just, I’m not real comfortable as to how that all gets interpreted. It’s not to scale that so it’s just not translating very well for me as far as what I think the idea is, so it makes me a little uncomfortable.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Commissioner Peterson.

COMMISSIONER PETERSON: I understand that installation is going to be a concern, I also understand wanting to add an element to your building to make it stand out, unique, be updated but yet cohesive with the environment around the because you did choose the green with the buildings nearby; the size, not being able to, that’s a little bit helpful, but the other thing too is the depth of it is a concern for me on the rounded corner because it’s not an accent piece, it’s not an edge like a border, it’s a very large block so I’m having difficulty, that helps a little bit but, understanding that it, I think that’s going to be the only element that you see and I’m not sure that that is exactly what he wants because I can’t visualize what that is or, but I don’t think it’s good have the desired effect and it’s gonna create a standard of something that I am not sure goes with the wishes for how this development is going forward. So, that’s my concern.

MR. ABNOS: There’s a misunderstanding gentlemen here, lady. This piece (Inaudible) this going up and down. This will go around the entire perimeter, this too will (Inaudible) to go from (Inaudible) coming down not around the corner.

(Inaudible)

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: If I can follow up, Mr. Chairman?

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Please, Mr. Bogina.

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: And even though we are in Commission discussion right now, but you are saying that the accent pieces only go on the east and the west.

MR. ABNOS: Correct.

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: And not along the bottom and the top.

MR. ABNOS: That’s right.

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: And so your picture doesn’t really depict…

MR. ABNOS: I didn’t give any pictures, sir.

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: Your partial picture of the design doesn’t really depict any extension at the top or around the sides, okay.

(Inaudible)

DEPUTY PLANNING DIRECTOR ALLMON: To be honest, I prepared that just so you would have an idea of what the tile would look like on the…

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: Mr. Chairman, I think the only purpose of this is to attract attention and I usually, we don’t try to take the visual architectural details and use them to create some shiny portion of the building. I think that this is not a bad idea, but I think it should be disbursed throughout the parapet wall or the sidewall and become part of the architecture not just something that is thrown up there and I think the amount of green color this is what it is, is gonna be shocking to the buildings next-door which are more traditional and then the auto parts, Goodyear and the Walgreens and I think you pose those two together with this bright green on the east, west side and I think it, it’s just a shocking change between the two, but I’m not opposed to something like this if an architect brought in something that took this type of system and incorporated it along the entire building but just to throw it on there like it’s some, and I’m not trying to offend the developer, like it’s some afterthought years later as to what jazz’s it up after it’s been done for some time. I think it’s kind of a architectural styling mistake, myself.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Commissioner Peterson.

COMMISSIONER PETERSON: Yes, Chairman. I’m curious, can I ask the applicant a question during this portion?

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Yeah, go ahead.

COMMISSIONER PETERSON: You mentioned that an architect came up with this and he has and you’ve seen other pictures, would you be adverse to us tabling this until he could give us a rendering so that we could; I think our biggest problem is we can’t visualize it; we have sketches and bits and pieces of the puzzle and not the whole puzzle. Is that something you would be willing to do?

MR. ABNOS: I think I’ve had enough of this nonsense. I’m done with you guys. Thank you.

(Inaudible)

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: Thanks for coming.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Thank you.

MR. ABNOS: I’m gonna leave it exactly how it is. No paint, no nothing.

Mr. Abnos left the meeting.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Would someone like to make a motion on this recommendation? Commissioner Bogina.

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: Mr. Chairman, I would move that we deny the revised site plan for SP-27-16-09; a façade, exterior façade revision at 10909 Shawnee Mission Parkway.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Is there a second? Commissioner Braley.

COMMISSIONER BRALEY: I’ll second that motion.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: There’s a motion and second to deny the application SP-27-16-09; revised site plan for façade revisions at the Abdiana Building, located at 10909 Shawnee Mission Parkway. All in favor of denial say yes.

COMMISSIONERS: Yes.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: All opposed nay? The site plan is denied.


(Motion passed 9-0; Les Smith absent)

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Next item is:

E. OTHER BUSINESS


PLANNING DIRECTOR CHAFFEE: In your packets we provided you with a draft of a proposed senior living amenity policy that is intended to go hand-in-hand with any amendments that we may make to the Zoning Regulations at that October 17 meeting. We had a little bit of discussion at the last meeting; staff sort of outlined how that brochure may be created so be put something together that we hope you like and that will be useful. We talked about the purpose, why we have the senior amenity policy in place; and that we recognize senior living facilities provide different types of amenities that another apartment complex that’s just for the general public; it can sort of go hand-in-hand before looking at increased density because a senior living development has as much land as a normal apartment complex because some of the amenities that you see outside like a swimming pool or parking may actually be underground parking or there may be more recreation facilities inside the building or there may be an indoor swimming pool so the second part talks about the amenities based on density and basically says, you know, if you’re looking at the higher density for a senior living facility then we expect that more amenities perhaps be permitted and at the same time we make comments in there regarding the architectural features of the building and the materials that we expect to be used, that they be high quality durable and that there be a little bit of architecture to the building to also make that pleasing to the residents; and selecting amenities to where the residents get to know each other and a lot of the literature that staff’s read over the last few weeks that’s maybe just as important as the living conditions themselves is just to have the residents interact with each other and remain active and provide the opportunities for them to do so.

So, the third portion talks about the number of amenities to be provided and we base them roughly on density that we already have in the number of units or the number of amenities that are provided are based on the number of units that are provided in the building; that doesn’t mean you only have one, if you read closely we say at least one and hopefully the hand is sort of dropped. And then we made a listing of indoor and outdoor types of amenities that we might be expecting and then sort of leave the menu open for the developer to choose the outdoor and indoor amenities that they would like to provide and the list is not intended to be all-inclusive; if someone comes up with another amenity that they found works really well in the development that they perhaps have already completed we would certainly be open to having them present that amenity in addition to what we already have.

So, the intent is as developers come in and we talk about senior living facilities that we would also get them the amenity policy so they could make their decisions and make some choices that they have; we also provide them with multifamily design standards that talk about what materials we are taking a look at and doing; we also make special note in the amenity package just to give developers up front that the Planning Commission at the city is going to be looking at how they are going to provide safe rooms/shelter space for the residents who live in the complex itself which is similar to what we do for any multifamily type structure probably larger than four units in size.

So, if you have any comments or…our goal is take anything that you have two offer for us tonight and then we’ll bring a, well a completed document to the Planning Commission meeting in October at the same time as when we have our public hearing on the other issues.

COMMISSIONER JOHN SMITH: recommended adding food services verbiage to the third paragraph under Purpose; adding the minimum number of parking spaces that are required; adding exercise room under indoor/outdoor amenities options list; change verbiage for transportation services.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: recommended adding enhanced landscaping criterion to the brochure.

COMMISSIONER PETERSON: recommended changes to the wording/phrasing under Purpose; changing diamond points to bullet points; removing sentence form from amenity options; keeping verbiage for transportation services as-is; specifying length for walking trails of significant length.

COMMISSIONER BRALEY: asked for clarification on when developers receive the brochure.

PLANNING DIRECTOR CHAFFEE: explained the brochure is given to the developers as the pre-submittal meeting.

COMMISSIONER BRALEY: agreed with Commissioner Peterson’s recommendation for bullet points.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Any further discussions? Paul, do you want us to vote on a recommendation or do you have enough information?

PLANNING DIRECTOR CHAFFEE: No, we have enough information. We’ll bring it back on the second meeting in October.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Terrific. Is there any other business staff has for the Commission?

PLANNING DIRECTOR CHAFFEE: Staff has no other business this evening.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Is there any Commission business for the staff? Is there…Commissioner Wise.

COMMISSIONER BRALEY: Just a suggestion since City Council moved their start time, I’d suggest at the next meeting we consider a motion to adjust our start time to 7:00 p.m.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Terrific. I’m not so sure but what we found out is that we can change it to whatever time we see so in essence if you would like to make a motion we can vote on it tonight. Correct? There’s no issue with that other than the meetings that are already published.

PLANNING DIRECTOR CHAFFEE: I would prefer it be an agenda item so that the public knows that we’re taking a look at doing that, so we’ll add that on as New Business at the next meeting.

COMMISSIONER BIENHOFF: Could we have some discussion on that item?

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Commissioner Bienhoff, yes.

COMMISSIONER BIENHOFF: I would just submit that for some of us 7:00 will be extremely challenging and may not be able to attend.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Commissioner Bogina, did you have something to add?

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: I have a different subject.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Okay. Anybody else on this?

PLANNING DIRECTOR CHAFFEE: And just because it’s on an agenda doesn’t mean you have to…

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Correct, we can vote it down. Okay. That finishes that then. Commissioner Bogina, did you have something?

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: Paul, did the City Council act on the recommendations of the sidewalk for the park yet from the Capital Improvement Plan?

PLANNING DIRECTOR CHAFFEE: The Committee has taken a look at it. It’ll go to the Governing Body on next Monday.

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: Okay, I didn’t know what time, when it was gonna be.

PLANNING DIRECTOR CHAFFEE: Yeah, we’ve run some cost estimates on how much would just a sidewalk cost, how much for full improvements of the street cost, and you know, the dilemma there is kind of if they drop this in than what comes off or, you know, is it something that it goes on with an understanding that if some budgets, or some of the items come in lower than anticipated then is it the opportunity that this is the project then it gets dumped in to re-coup some of those costs. So, they’ll be having a full discussion Monday night.

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: All right, thank you.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Any other questions for staff? Commissioner Smith.

COMMISSIONER JOHN SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The tour of the landfill was postponed. Is that back on or…

PLANNING DIRECTOR CHAFFEE: They are looking at dates to go ahead and get it back on. It would’ve been pretty messy if we’d been in there as scheduled.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Commissioner Peterson.

COMMISSIONER PETERSON: I sent an email earlier to Paul this week regarding signs and LED lighting. One in particular that is in my quadrant that I drive frequently and I was curious if we wanted with the development of…I think we’re gonna see a lot more lighted signs because LED is so much more cost effective then it has been in the past and was curious if we wanted to be proactive rather than reactive or what are you seeing in the plans that are being brought to you if any?

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Actually, I think this has been brought up and I think that’s got to come before us here shortly.

PLANNING DIRECTOR CHAFFEE: The questions are, have been asked so we’ll bring something forward and see what you want. And that’s nothing that the Planning Commission passes and approves; the sign code is out of our purview; but we can certainly say hey we talked about it, what do you think.

COMMISSIONER PETERSON: Is that all under zoning or does that fall under…

PLANNING DIRECTOR CHAFFEE: No, that’s the Governing Body. (Inaudible) yeah, it’s a whole different section; it’s not in the Zoning Ordinance.

COMMISSIONER PETERSON: Cool, thank you.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Anything else? How about a motion for adjournment? Commissioner Braley.

F. ADJOURNMENT

COMMISSIONER BRALEY: I’d like to make a motion that we adjourn this evening’s meeting.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Thank you. Commissioner Bogina, would you like to second that?

COMMISSIONER BOGINA: Second.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: All in favor say aye.

COMMISSIONERS: Aye.

CHAIRMAN BUSBY: Opposed nay? We’re adjourned, thank you.


(Motion passed 9-0; Les Smith absent)