Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTE5 <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />OCTOBER 27, 1993 <br />that requiring the billboard to be removed at the <br />termination of the lease was asking Two S Properties to <br />give up something of immense economic impact. Jones <br />felt that such a condition would be out-of-line. <br />Pedersen pointed out Jones' previous comments that the <br />rent being paid Two S Properties by Naegele for the <br />billboard was not that significant. Pedersen asked the <br />concern for removal of the sign when the lease expires. <br />Jones noted that at expiration of the lease, the sign <br />becomes the property of Two S Properties. Jones stated <br />that his concern was that the sign may be very valuable <br />in 40 years time. <br />Pedersen pointed out that the sign is illegal and <br />questioned the continuation of an illegal activity <br />because it has economic benefit. Pedersen felt the <br />bottom line was how much the City wanted to spend to <br />get the sign removed. Pedersen felt that there are a <br />lot of illegal activities that have an economic benefit <br />to someone, but this was no reason to continue those <br />illegal activities. <br />Jones pointed out that right now there is a lease <br />arrangement for the sign between Naegele and Two S <br />Properties. At the termination of that lease, Two S <br />Properties would have ownership of the sign. <br />The City Administrator pointed out that with Two S <br />Properties being owner of the sign, the compensatory <br />benefits payable under case law would be more clear <br />cut. The City's recourse would be against Two S <br />Properties rather than Naegele, and the City would have <br />Two S Properties in a better position. <br />Pedersen could not believe that a billboard would have <br />that many rights because of its value, and that the <br />City does not have more control over its removal. <br />Mr. Morelan introduced the following resolution and <br />moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION NO. 93-10-246 - APPROVING THE AMENDMENT TO <br />PUD AS REQUESTED BY TWO S PROPERTIES TO ALLOW THE <br />CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITIONAL MINI-STORAGE BUILDING AT <br />55 EAST COUNTY ROAD B SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE <br />RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CITY PLANNER AS OUTLINED IN HIS <br />REPORT DATED SEPTEMBER 3~ 1993 <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Pedersen. <br />Ayes (4) Morelan, Pedersen, Hanson, LaValle. <br />Nays (1) Scalze. Resolution declared adopted. <br />Page 7 <br />