Laserfiche WebLink
Proponent <br /> Tom Rose, 4311-6th Street N.E. , Columbia Heights, speaking for Mr. <br /> Aulwes who he indicated was unable to attend. • <br /> *indicated the applicant was proposing to erect two signs, one on the <br /> front of the restaurant and the other on the east side which would be <br /> more visible to prospective customers approaching St. Anthony from <br /> Highway 88 or St. Anthony Boulevard; <br /> *reported Mr. Aulwes had been in the restaurant business for the past <br /> year and a half; <br /> *said he owned a smaller restaurant in Columbia Heights (Tom's Cafe) <br /> but expected the St. Anthony restaurant would be "his bread and butter" <br /> and "a step up" from the other restaurant; <br /> *confirmed that the applicant does intend to remove the roof sign <br /> which is still on the building. <br /> There was no one else present to speak either for or against the <br /> variance and Chair Wagner closed the hearing at 8: 24 P.M. <br /> A short discussion of the test well the Army was digging east of the <br /> property preceded the Commission's motion recommending approval . <br /> Commissioner Hansen commented that he perceived the new signage would <br /> be "a vast improvement over the previous signage on that building. " <br /> commission Recommendation <br /> Motion by Werenicz, seconded by Hansen to recommend the City Council <br /> grant the request from Thomas J. Aulwes for a variance from the sign <br /> regulations of the City Code to allow two signs, 56 square feet each <br /> (113 square feet total ) on the TA Family Restaurant at 2905 Kenzie <br /> Terrace, where the City Sign Ordinance only allows one sign, 100 square <br /> feet, for that building. ' As a condition for granting the variance, the <br /> owner is required to remove the existing roof sign on the building as <br /> he had stated would be done in his Petition for Sign Variance. <br /> In recommending the variance be granted, the Planning Commission finds <br /> that: <br /> 1. all three conditions required by statute to be satisfied <br /> affirmatively have been met with this proposal; <br /> 2. the fact that the restaurant is located on three streets <br /> seems to justify the variance; <br /> 3. no opposition to the variance was expressed either to staff <br /> prior to the hearing or during the hearing. <br /> Motion carried unanimously. <br /> 8 <br />