Laserfiche WebLink
098 <br />COUNCII, MEETING <br />Page Eight January 28, 1985 <br />Mr. Adams asked why he would be assessed. He already has sewer <br />and is being assessed for it. He was told he would have no further <br />sewer assessment but possibly water assessment. <br />Mr. McDonough said it is his understanding that it would be a lot <br />cheaper to tie in with Shoreview now instead of wait for some time <br />in the future. <br />Mr. Kulaszewicz moved to close the public hearing at 8:55 P.M. <br />Mr. Marier seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. <br />Recess for five minutes. <br />The Council further discussed the Lino Lakes cost of the Shoreview <br />system of $43,600, what areas were buildable, what effect on the <br />project would elimination of the area wide charge be, would this <br />have to be born by the City, should deferred assessments be further <br />discussed with the residents. <br />Mr. - Marier -said the Baldwin Lake -Drive residents made it very clear <br />they did -not want- the project -and- the City- should not push - it down'. <br />their throats. <br />Mr. Kulaszewicz moved to resurvey the petitioners to see if they <br />are still. interested in the utility. Mr. Marier seconded the motion. <br />Motion carried unanimously. <br />PLANNING AND ZONING REPORT - PETER KLUEGEL <br />1 <br />1 <br />A. Larry Swistowski - Sign Variance. Mr. Kluegel explained Mr. <br />Swistowski has an existing 320' (10 -' X 32'_) non - permitted <br />advertising-sign, mounted- on a semi - truck trailer on his prop -- - <br />erty- adjacent to 35W and zoned rural_ Advertising signs over <br />six square feet require a conditional use permit. Mr. Swistowski <br />is proposing -a temporary advertising sign mounted on a wood._ <br />frame - (ordinance requires. stee12-frame•)_ and he is also- request -ing_ <br />a variance to the set back requirement. <br />The Planning and Zoning Board has recommended denial of both <br />requests due -to the_ fact that the sign does.not conform to <br />the 1200' separation between advertising signs on the same <br />side of the street and that-the proposed-sign is constructed <br />of wood not steel frame-and-does-not-fall within the temporary <br />sign definition in the sign ordinance. <br />Mr. Swistowski asked that this temporary sign be allowed to <br />stand through 1985 to recoup his investment and to determine <br />how much it will affect his business. They are considering <br />locating their business nearer the City and this period of <br />time will allow them to make this decision. <br />1 <br />