Laserfiche WebLink
Minutes <br />MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />LITTLE CANADA, MINNESOTA <br />September 10, 1987 <br />Pursuant to due call and notice thereof a regular meeting of the <br />Planning Commission of the City of Little Canada, Minnesota was <br />held on the 10th day of September, 1987 in the Council Chambers <br />of the City Center located at 515 Little Canada Road in said City. <br />Chairman Peter Costa called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. and <br />the following members were present at roll call: <br />MEMBERS PRESENT: Peter Costa, Chairman <br />Bill Davison <br />Gene DeLonais <br />Art Herkenhoff <br />Tom Perlinger <br />Peggy Schweizer <br />MEMBERS ABSENT: Sharon Timmons <br />ALSO PRESENT: Steve Grittman, City Planner <br />Kathleen Glanzer, Recording Secretary <br />There being no corrections of the minutes of the August 13, 1987 <br />meeting, the Chairman declared that the minutes would stand approved <br />as read. <br />Slumberland Mr. Tom Ruvelson, representing Sign Consultants, 4111 Central Avenue, <br />Sign N.E., Minneapolis, appeared before the Commission requesting two sign <br />Variance variances for sign area and height be approved for the Slumberland <br />development. <br />The City Planner reported that the applicant is requesting an additional <br />180 square feet of sign over the 200 square feet allowed by Code, and <br />also that the sign height be 40 feet, while Code allows 25 feet. <br />The Planner recommended that the sign height variance be approved <br />as similar variances have been approved in the past for signs along <br />the freeway. However, the Planner recommended that the sign area <br />variance be denied as there is no hardship present warranting <br />that a variance be approved. <br />Schweizer asked how the Slumberland variance request related to the <br />McDonald's sign. <br />The Planner explained that the existing McDonald's sign met Code <br />requirements when it was erected. However, the Code has since been <br />changed and the sign is grandfathered in under the Code unless <br />McDonald's requests a change in their signage. The Planner reported <br />that McDonald's did request a sign variance a couple of years ago <br />which was denied as there was no hardship present. <br />Page 1 <br />