Laserfiche WebLink
Councilmember LeTourneau agreed that the view from the highway would not be benefited but <br />his concern is with the development around that neighborhood and how the neighbors would <br />view that pole. He stated that originally the intent was to blend in with the building and create an <br />aesthetic for the user of the building and the people in that area. He stated that he would like to <br />stay within the policy as much as possible. He stated that he would support the height but would <br />like the aesthetic portion for the first six feet to be included. <br />Community Development Director Gladhill noted that change could occur as this would be a <br />Conditional Use Permit. <br />Mayor Strommen stated that in review of the Planning Commission minutes they had decided <br />that in this case they were in agreement with providing flexibility but would also like to further <br />discuss the policy going forward. <br />Councilmember Kuzma asked if this would have to go back to the Planning Commission. <br />Mayor Strommen stated that the Council could simply amend the recommendation as there is not <br />additional work to be done. <br />Community Development Director Gladhill asked that the Council remain cognizant about the <br />60 day review rule should this be directed to go back to the Planning Commission. <br />Councilmember Riley stated that while he understands the policy direction he also acknowledges <br />that could be an investment that would not be seen. <br />Councilmember Shryock asked where the sign would be located on the property. <br />Community Development Director Gladhill identified the site location map that was included in <br />the Council packet. <br />Councilmember Riley asked if the pole would be visible from Highway 10 or the interchange. <br />Community Development Director Gladhill stated that it would be helpful to have more in depth <br />drawings in this and future cases. He stated that there would be some visibility at some points <br />but there would be several points that would be severely obstructed. <br />Mayor Strommen stated that there is no finding of fact in relation to this issue specifically and <br />suggested that item be addressed. <br />Community Development Director Gladhill stated that another finding could be added stating <br />that due to the proximity and grade change that the item could be waived in this situation. He <br />stated that there will be some points that the pole would be visible to public view but there would <br />be many areas where the view would be obstructed. He agreed that a continued policy <br />discussion would be helpful in the future. <br />City Council / November 24, 2015 <br />Page 6 of 11 <br />