At a recent meeting Milford City Council approved changes to deed restrictions in Independence Commons. Before the discussion, Councilman Jason James recused himself as he owns property in the industrial park.
“Independence Commons was developed by the city in the mid-2000s,” City Planner Rob Pierce said. “It is the corporate park on the north side of Airport Road that contains the Veterans Home, Food Bank, Boys and Girls Club along with smaller businesses. The development of that corporate center included a set of deed restrictions that were originally recorded back in 2008, and those restrictions were modified in 2016 and again in 2023.”
Pierce explained that there were various articles related to the zoning of the property, easements, common expenses, architectural requirements and even some related to signage.
“The deed restrictions we have for the sign portion goes above and beyond what we currently have in our zoning and it was determined after some recent applications for signage that a lot of the monument signs within the corporate center for Independence Commons did not comply with the deed restrictions which meant some, not all, didn’t meet some of the criteria,” Pierce said. “So staff presented this information to the Code Enforcement and Economic Development Committee in July with an initial recommendation of striking the sign requirements in their entirety.”
Pierce stated that the committee felt some of the restrictions should remain, so a modified version of the deed restrictions was presented in August with approval from the committee. That version was presented to council.
“There would still be an architectural review that would be done, but it would be based on the architectural requirements for the construction of the principal building,” Pierce said. “The sign would have to kind of be in conjunction with the architectural style of the building that it’s serving and there does not provide a new avenue that, if the decision of the planning office is that the sign does not comply with those standards, they have the ability to appeal the decision to the Planning Commission.”
According to Pierce, there was no mechanism in the deed for appeal should a property owner disagree with the planning director decision. The matter was opened for public comment and there were no remarks for or against the changes.
The changes were approved with a vote of 7 to 0 with one recusal.
