03-22-1989 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES City Council August 24, 1988 Fina Serve Sign Height Variance (Cont.) Mrs. Scalze introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 88 -8 -348 - CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE FINA SERVE REQUEST FOR SIGN HEIGHT VARIANCE The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mr. Blesener. Ayes (5) Scalze, Blesener, Fahey, Collova, LaValle. Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted. This resolution appears in Resolution Book No. 20, Page 355. Fahey felt the situation was unique and warranted a variance. Collova agreed and stated that he would rather see a two -pole sign than the 4 -pole sign remain. LaValle felt that the sign would have little impact on anyone and that the variance should be granted. The Planner pointed out that if the variance is not granted, under Code requirements, the signage should be brought into conformance. Fahey did not agree with requiring the sign to be lowered just because the property owner is improving the site. Fahey pointed out that a variance requires four affirmative votes of the Council for approval. Mr. Fahey introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 88 -8 -349 - APPROVING THE FINA SERVE SIGN HEIGHT VARIANCE FOR THEIR BUSINESS LOCATED AT 2244 RICE STREET BASED ON THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE UNIQUE SITUATION WHICH EXISTS AS WELL AS A HARDSHIP SINCE THE REQUEST IS FOR A NEW SIGN TO BE PLACED AT THE SAME HEIGHT AS THE EXISTING SIGN, AND POINTING OUT THE PRECEDENT WHICH WAS SET IN THE UNICAL CASE The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mr. Collova. Ayes (3) Fahey, Collova, LaValle. Nays (2) Blesener, Scalze. Resolution denied. This resolution appears in Resolution Book No. 20, Pages 356 and 357. Fahey felt that the Ordinance should be changed so that Fina Serve is not required to lower their existing sign due to site improvements they are making. Page 53