Laserfiche WebLink
1 Payment of the September 22nd statement from Braun Engineering had been <br />tabled at the previous Council meeting for further information and <br />Councilmember Enrooth indicated he still didn't fully understand the <br />4 company's November 17th explanation to Mr. Hamer. Mr. Childs indicated <br />5 he perceived a portion of the attachments to that letter had been left <br />6 out of the agenda packet and explained that the Council would be paying <br />7 for the testing costs for the concrete, curbing, bituminous on St. <br />8 Anthony Boulevard and for the concrete work done on Kenzie Terrace in <br />9 conjunction with the traffic signal installation. He also indicated <br />10 that these costs had been reversed on the September billing. <br />11 Council Action <br />12 Motion by Marks, seconded by Makowske to approve payment of $4,852.60 <br />13 to Braun Engineering Testing with $4,141.35 to be paid for the St. <br />14 Anthony Boulevard project and $711.25 for the Kenzie Terrace Project <br />15 contingent upon a corrected billing being submitted to staff. <br />16 Motion carried unanimously. <br />17 The requested public appearance relating to the St. Anthony float/queen <br />18 candidate was deferred to later in the agenda. <br />19 REPORTS <br />20 NOVEMBER 15, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - RICK WERENICZ <br />The Planning Commission representative indicated action on the R. L. <br />e2 Johnson Investment Co. request for a sign variance had been tabled for <br />23 a month to allow the applicants to work with staff on a more acceptable <br />24 sign proposal. <br />25 Video Update Expansion Approval Contingent Upon No Flashing Lights and <br />26 Improvements Meeting Codes <br />27 Commissioner Werenicz reported the Planning Commission had accepted <br />28 Craig Belisle's claim that he had not realized he needed a building <br />29 permit to expand his Video Update business into the space next to his <br />30 store. The Commission had perceived there might have been failure in <br />31 communication between staff and the store owner which had resulted in <br />32 the store's retention of flashing lights in the windows, which are in <br />33 violation of the City Sign Ordinance. The Commission was therefore <br />34 recommending the conditional use permit Video Update received in 1984 <br />35 be expanded to cover the new store space on the condition that the non - <br />36 conforming lights be removed altogether. <br />37 Councilmember Enrooth said he was concerned that a businessman who had <br />38 been operating a store in the City for the number of years Mr. Belisle <br />39 had would not have become more knowledgeable about the rules and <br />40 regulations under which he was licensed to operate and he questioned <br />41 whether the extension should be granted until some of the questions on <br />