My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC PACKET 12221987
StAnthony
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
1987
>
CC PACKET 12221987
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2015 4:26:35 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 4:26:25 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
18
SP Folder Name
CC PACKETS 1987-1989
SP Name
CC PACKET 12221987
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
Councilmember Enrooth: <br /> 2 *perceived the -City' s instructions to applicants needed tighten-- <br /> 3 ing up to avoid recurrence of this problem. <br /> 4 Councilmember Marks : j <br /> 5 *agreed staff ' s procedures needed to be "beefed up" to the ext- <br /> 6 ent that all sign applicants would be furnished with written <br /> 7 instructions which stated that the Planning Commission 'is only <br /> 8 an advisory body and they should do nothing about signage until <br /> 9 after they had received an O.K. from the Council. <br /> 10 Councilmember Ranallo: <br /> 11 *wondered if better communication might have prevented what had <br /> 12 happened at the Dairy Queen where the City had perceived only a I <br /> 13 remodeling permit was being sought and, in fact, the day after <br /> 14 it had been granted the whole building was torn down. <br /> 15 <br /> 16 Before calling the vote on the motion, Mayor Sundland admonished Mr. <br /> 17 Gow in the future not to let 'his enthusiasm to serve his customers <br /> 18 prevent him from looking a little more closely for "unique signage <br /> 19 requirements" , although in this case, the general feeling had been <br /> 20 that St. Anthony' s ordinance could in no way be considered to be <br /> different from other cities . The Mayor told the sign company <br /> 2 representative he perceived neither the City nor his client had been <br /> i <br /> 23 well served in this instance. The restaurant owner was also :cau- <br /> 24 tioned that if he ever had to remove the signage for a remodeling <br /> 25 project, the ordinance would require him to repeat the entire variance <br /> 26 procedure before it could be reinstalled on the building. Mayor <br /> 27 Sundland told Mr. Farrell he wouldn' t bet on his getting those I <br /> 28 variances and was quite certain any extensive refurbishing plans <br /> 29 would have to include the removal of the non-conforming roof sign <br /> 30 altogether . <br /> 31 Voting on the motion: I <br /> 32 Aye: Ranallo, Marks , Enrooth, Sundland. l <br /> 33 Nay: Makowske. <br /> 34 Motion carried. <br /> 35 <br /> 36 Rapid Oil Given Until October , 1988 to Take Pylon Sign Down <br /> 37 The Council accepted the Commission' s recommendation that the <br /> 38 existing, non-conforming pylon sign in front of the Rapid Oil Change <br /> 39 facility at 3701 Silver Lake Road should be removed now that gas is no <br /> 40 longer sold from the property. However, the owners were given a <br /> 401 little more time to keep the sign as identification while they are <br /> 2 remodeling their building. <br /> 13 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.