My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-25-90 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1990
>
04-25-90 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/3/2009 3:00:47 PM
Creation date
7/31/2009 2:53:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
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
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />APRIL 25, 1990 <br />Boosalis replied that he would move one of the signs to <br />the corner of Rice Street and County Road C and set it <br />at an angle so that it would be visible from both <br />streets. Boosalis showed a rendering of where he <br />proposed the placement of the three pylons, showing the <br />second along Rice Street in the center of the shopping <br />center's frontage, and the third pylon for Rapid Oil at <br />the south end of their building. <br />Fahey felt it important for an independent business <br />outlet like Rapid Oil to have its own pylon. <br />Scalze pointed out that the property on which Rapid oil <br />is located had been zoned single-family residential, <br />therefore, the argument that the site could have been <br />an independent commercial site was not a valid one. <br />Fahey disagreed that the property would ever have <br />developed as single-family residential. <br />Boosalis pointed out that even with the third pylon <br />sign that he is requesting, he will have 100 square <br />feet in signage less than what he is allowed. <br />Scalze pointed out that the amount of square footage <br />the City's ordinance allows is liberal compared to <br />other citiese <br />Boosalis pointed out the amount of frontage the <br />shopping center has on two streets and the need for <br />signage to tie the center together. Boosalis pointed <br />out that the City's survey showed that five out of the <br />six cities surveyed would allow a third pylon in this <br />instance, <br />Blesener stated that a building permit should not have <br />been issued until a total signage plan for the shopping <br />center was approved. <br />Boosalis pointed out the constraints that he and the <br />City had worked under in meeting deadlines for <br />occupancy for MGM as well as the Tax Increment <br />Financing that was involved. Boosalis stated that he <br />is not trying to slip something in at this time, but <br />always thought the center would be allowed three <br />pylons. Boosalis pointed out that the three signs were <br />shown on the plans that were submitted to the Building <br />Inspector. <br />The City Planner pointed out that those plans were <br />never submitted to his office or the City Council. <br />Page 18 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.