My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PL PACKET 11151988
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
1983
>
PL PACKET 11151988
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/2/2017 12:07:20 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 3:29:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
15
SP Folder Name
PL PACKETS 1983
SP Name
PL PACKET 01181983
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
67
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
. ain thou <br /> illa e <br /> fDA7'r]E : A P PROVA <br /> NQvember 9 , 19RR ko <br /> TO : planning Commission Members <br /> FROM : <br /> David M. Childs, City Manager <br /> ITEM : R. L. JOHNSON INVESTMENT CO. SIGN VARIANCE REQUEST <br /> This request from R. L. Johnson Investment Co. is for a ground sign (2 <br /> sided) of 118 square feet and overall height of 11.9 feet. The site <br /> is the south side- of the old _Medtronic building, which is located in a <br /> light industrial zone. <br /> Section 430, Subdivision 6 of the City code (page 9 of the Sign code) <br /> speaks to this issue: <br /> >A two sided sign may be 32 square feet in size (16 square <br /> feet per side) unless it is less than 5 feet in height. A <br /> square footage bonus is allowed if the sign is shorter <br /> than 5 feet in height. That is not the case in this <br /> request, so no bonus is given. <br /> >A sign may be taller than 5 feet (maximum 8 feet) if it <br /> is landscaped in accordance with Subd. 6, d. 2. This does <br /> not, however, allow the sign to be larger than 32 square <br /> feet. <br /> >The proposed ground sign would be in lieu of a wall sign on <br /> the building (see sign code, page 11 (C.2) . <br /> The applicant requests a sign which is 86 square feet larger and at <br /> least 3.9 feet taller than the ordinance allows (if landscaping were <br /> shown on the plans) . Since no landscaping is shown, it is really 6.9 <br /> feet too tall. <br /> Arguments for a sign larger than 32 square feet: <br /> *The building is located on Highway 88 which has traffic speeds <br /> higher than most other light industrial sues in the City, so greater <br /> visibility is needed. <br /> *The building is the largest industrial building in the City <br /> (100,000+ square feet, with 68,000 square feet leasable) and could <br /> potentially have several tenants which need identification. <br /> Arguments against such a variance: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.