My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PL PACKET 05181993
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
1993
>
PL PACKET 05181993
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2015 5:25:53 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 5:25:42 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
20
SP Folder Name
PL PACKETS 1993
SP Name
PL PACKET 05181993
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
81
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
1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> APRIL 20 , 1993 <br /> 3 PAGE 5 <br /> 4 <br /> 5 <br /> 6 Commissioner Gondorchin felt there was no hardship . He also <br /> 7 noted that the sign did not include the identification of any <br /> 8 of the tenants in the office park . He would be inclined to <br /> 9 permit the sign as it is already in place . <br /> 10 <br /> 11 Commissioner Madden did not feel there was any hardship by not <br /> 12 allowing- this sign and felt it could not be allowed legally. <br /> 13 <br /> 14 Chair Faust stated he sees no hardship based on visibility . <br /> 15 <br /> 16 Commissioner Franzese noted that there are two issues to be <br /> 17 considered ; one of visibility and the second being the <br /> 18 irregular position of the building. Both of these issues could <br /> 19 be viewed as hardships . <br /> 20 <br /> 21 Commissioner Thompson felt the sign should remain as it does <br /> 22 not infringe on any residential area. <br /> 23 <br /> 24 Commissioner Werenicz suggested the sign could have been <br /> 25 installed projecting from the building and would have been <br /> 26 more effective. <br /> 0 Motion by Franzese, second by Thompson to recommend to the <br /> 29 City Council the approval of the petition for a sign variance <br /> 30 for an additional wall signage; finding that the three <br /> 31 conditions needed for approval have been met ; and no one was <br /> 32 in attendance to speak against this variance. <br /> 33 Roll call : Franzeses , Thompson - aye <br /> 34 Gondorchin, Werenicz, Madden, Faust - nay <br /> 35 <br /> 36 Motion fails <br /> 37 <br /> 38 <br /> 39 The Chair requested staff to advise the City Council that the <br /> 40 Planning Commission felt the hardship factor of this request <br /> 41 could not meet the requirements of Minnesota Statutes . <br /> 42 <br /> 43 This matter will be on the agenda of the May 11th Council <br /> 44 Meeting. Mt. Applequist was advised he would be welcome to <br /> 45 attend this .meeting. <br /> 46 <br /> 47 7 . MISCELLANEOUS <br /> 48 <br /> 49 A. Concept Review - Stop-N-Save, 3259 Stinson Boulevard <br /> 50 <br /> • <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.