Laserfiche WebLink
GIFFIN: I think it would behoove us to be consistent. And also I think that, especially in the next <br />agenda item,there were specific reasons for the three-year extension, you know, and I think that we <br />should be consistent. My other concern is with the applicants and whether or not they’ve had a <br />chance to digest all of the conditions that you just went over. And so once again, I really think we <br />should just take a little recess, maybe you can go ahead and speak to the applicants, because we are <br />saying that they are going to agree, if this is what we vote on right now, and I don’t know if that’s <br />fair to the applicants. I mean we get it because we do this all the time, but I want to make sure that <br />they do and they know what they are agreeing to. <br />BOWMAN: Just one more comment. I think if we are looking for consistency, we may want to put <br />in the no-exterior-signs. Just a comment. <br />BEAUDET: Comment, comment, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair? <br />HOUSEL: Yes. <br />BEAUDET: Would it be more reasonable to just request for the applicant to ask for a continuance <br />so that the recommended conditions can be done sufficiently and they would have sufficient time to <br />review and we could reconvene at a later date and time. <br />HOUSEL: Let’s ask. Would you consider a continuance so that we can put all the conditions <br />together so you have adequate time to review them? <br />CAITANO SR.: Yes, sure. <br />GONZALEZ: The other option is, if the staff can do it, they can sit with the applicant and show <br />them the conditions in writing while the Commission takes up other business in the meantime, and <br />then we’ll just recall their case, because they might want to take care of it today so they can start <br />moving along and getting their business going. So that’s another option available to the <br />Commission and the applicant. <br />ARAI: I think usually the largest hurdle in situations like this, is for staff to clearly understand the <br />grounds for approval of the permit. Now, your counsel spoke eloquently and offered suggestions <br />for your consideration, and that’s something again that could help us. And again, I think we are <br />quite far along with some of the conditions, again if you allow us the liberty of fine-tuning the <br />language. But a lot of these languages that I cited to you were incorporated in past permits. In fact, <br />I lifted a lot of these conditions from your next application, DeLuz, you know, so anyway -. And <br />then to address Commissioner Bowman’s question about exterior signage, and again the Planning <br />Director may want to jump in as well, I mean what you are approving here basically is a business, <br />okay, so as would any other business, you know, there should be a reasonable opportunity to <br />advertise like you would any other business. If this was being reviewed similar to a home <br />occupation, which is something that normally you wouldn’t have sense that there was something <br />going on inside of our residence, then I can see a restriction on signs; but everything I’ve seen to <br />date seems to be indicating that you want to approve this as a business, and therefore as a business <br />they should be provided an opportunity to sign their property. And, then that’s my thoughts and <br />maybe the Director may want to jump in, if she disagrees – but for your consideration. <br />14 <br />EXHIBIT A <br /> <br />