CC PACKET 12041984 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

J -6- 1 Commissioner Hansen, who lives..-di-rectly -behind .the Hertog property, indicated he 2 could see no advantage to this since most of the utility lines are already in place • 3 between the properties in that. area. :. Leo Hertog was concerned with the costs -4 involved. 5 6 Commissioner. Bjorklund said he had always_ favored underground utility Lines.,- but 7 was concerned-:that stipulation might cau'se'-problems for the neighbors east of the 8 project. He also indicated he perceived the Hertogs had already made large con- 9 cessions to the-City when they had decided to develop seven rather than ten lots 10 on that parcel and said he wouldn't want to increase the costs of the lots anymore 11 than necessary. 12 13 Commissioner Jones indicated 'he believed the costs would be only nominal and he 14 perceived these improvements would add to the value of the properties. The Com- 15 missioner then modified his amendment to indicate that only "the utility lines 16 which would provide service to the new structures themselves would be installed 17 underground". 18 19 Commissioner Bjorklund seconded the motion. 20 21 Commissioner Hansen persisted in his opposition to the condition until at least 22 he could see the plans for the installation. Mr. Childs said he would check with 23 NSP before the final action by the Council . 24 25 The question was called. 26 27 Voting on the motion to amend: 28 29 Aye: Jones, Bjorklund, ',Zawisl,ak, and Franzese. 30 31 Nay: Hansen. 32 33 Motion to amend carried. 34 35 The amended motion was carried unanimously. 36 37 At 9: 15 P.M. , Chair Zawislak read the notice of the hearing to consider a pe.titi,on 38 from the.Hair Station, 3909 Silver Lake Road, for the installation of a free standing 39 sign, with no more than 25 square feet of sign surface on each side, to identify 40 the business. The notice had been published in the Bulletin, November 6th, and 41 mailed to all property owners of record within 200 feet of the subject property. 42 No one present reported failure to receive the notice or objected to its content 43 and the Manager reported receiving no calls about th6 :proposal . 44 45 The reproduction of a picture of a similar sign to the one requested which hangs 46 in front of another Hair Station at 970 Osborne Road in Fridley had been included 47 in the agenda packet and Mr. Childs, in his November 16th memorandum related to the 48 sign request, had indicated the shop owner had told him the proposed sign for the 49 St. Anthony facility would be modified to one that was ground mounted and wider 50 than it was high. 51 52 Daniel Jaeger, 9418 East River Road, the petitioner and renter/owner of the shop, • 53 was present to get the Commissioners ' input as to-just what type of signage would 54 be likely to be approved to replace the sign-for the building 's previous occupant 55 which had been destroyed by- the tornado. That signage had been perceived by the