05-25-11 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MAY 25, 2011 McGraw introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 2011-5-100 — APPROVING THE PUD PERMIT TO OPERATE AN ACUPUNCTURE BUSINESS AT 2978 RICE STREET AS REQUESTED BY FEI XIAO, ETERNAL SPRING ACUPUNCTURE, SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CITY PLANNER AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Keis. Ayes (4). Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted. VARIANCE — Blesener opened the public hearing to consider the request for a Variance 125 LITTLE from the setback requirement to allow a monument sign within 6 inches of CANADA the street right -of -way at 125 Little Canada Road, The Village. It was ROAD — noted that the Planning Commission has recommended approval of the THE VILLAGE Variance. The City Planner reported that Sherman Associates has requested a Variance from the setback requirements for their monument sign to allow it within 6 inches of the Rice Street right -of -way. The Planner noted that when the sign was originally sited for this property it met the required setbacks. However, as part of the platting process, the County took additional right -of -way for Rice Street, resulting in the sign location being 6 inches from the right -of -way. The required setback for this sign is 5 feet. The Planner also noted that in the middle of this process, the State changed the statute relative to variances. Where the standard that needed to be met to warrant the granting of a variance was based on hardship, those standards are now whether or not there are practical difficulties in making use of the property and whether the City determines the property can be used in a reasonable manner. The Planner noted that he and the Planning Commission have recommended approval of the Variance request as it is believed that the conditions of the property are such that the sign could not be relocated in a manner that would make it visible to Rice Street. He pointed out that while the code would allow placement of the sign on the building, it does allow for a free- standing sign, and the applicant originally proposed a free- standing sign as part of the comprehensive sign plan for this property. 3