My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PL PACKET 08181987
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
1987
>
PL PACKET 08181987
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2015 3:35:36 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 3:35:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
15
SP Folder Name
PL PACKETS 1987
SP Name
PL PACKET 08181987
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
83
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
-12- <br /> • <br /> 2 Childs -said' if there is a ,Commission -consensus the City could make <br /> 3 arrangements to have Mr. Plaisted apply fora -variance for <br /> 4 the second mansard sign; <br /> 5 Wagner -said he would support a variance for two signs.. <br /> 6 Werenicz -said he didn' t think the proposal had been presented to the <br /> 7 Commission as it should have been and next time he would not <br /> 8 be satisfied with "letting the City look at it later," <br /> 9 however, indicated he couldn't see forcing additional costs. <br /> 10 to rectify the mistakes; and <br /> 11 -said he would recommend approval of the necessary variances <br /> 12 for the additional signage when it came before the Commis- <br /> 13 sion. <br /> 14 Plaisted -told Commissioner Wingard the shopping center owners are <br /> 15 responsible for resurfacing the parking lot around his <br /> 16 store. He said he has a letter from Eberhardt. promising <br /> 17 the center would be updated if he rebuilt his 'store to <br /> 18 match their renovation plans. A threat to take legal action <br /> 19 against the owners had resulted in the attorney who is <br /> 20 supposed to be responsible for the center promising to come <br /> 21 to visit the store owner in July. The attorney had also <br /> 22 indicated the owners would not want the City to condemn <br /> 23 their property; <br /> 24 -said the business leaders were 100% behind the City taking <br /> 25 firmer measures against the center owners. <br /> 26 Childs -told the store owner he had certainly been more successful <br /> 27 in getting a more positive response than the City had been. <br /> 28 Mr. Plaisted was thanked for coming in and giving his side of the <br /> 29 controversy. <br /> 30 OTHER BUSINESS <br /> 31 The June 23rd advisory on recent U.S. Supreme Court case --affecting <br /> 32 municipal zoning practices and the article from the Engineering News <br /> 33 Record on the same issue which had been provided by Commissioner Madden <br /> 34 were discussed briefly. <br /> 35 Before the meeting was adjourned the new retail center near Apache and <br /> 36 the proposals the H.R.A. anticipates receiving from various developers <br /> 37 related to finishing the Kenzie project were reported on by the- City' <br /> 38 Manager. <br /> i <br /> 39 The Stonehouse project also reported on including the possibility of • <br /> 40 Mannings taking over the food service in the remodeled bar and the long <br /> 41 amount of - time it ,takes - to get steel roof trusses for the warehouse <br /> 42 portion. <br /> I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.