Laserfiche WebLink
DoRSEY & WHITNEY <br /> Mr. Tom Burt <br /> January 3, 1991 <br /> Page 2 <br /> "DISTRICT SCHEDULES: signs shall be permitted as set forth in the <br /> following Subdivisions a to c inclusive, which are hereby made and declared <br /> part of this ordinance." <br /> This could be read to mean that signs are not permitted at all if they are not specified <br /> in Subdivisions a to c. If that were the correct interpretation, then a variance would <br /> be necessary for any sign irL the recreational/open space district other than those for <br /> which no permit is required. <br /> The ordinance could also be interpreted to mean that since signs in the <br /> recreational/open space district are not specifically prohibited, they are authorized if <br /> a permit is issued for the sign under Section 430:40. One problem with this <br /> interpretation is that there would be no standards in the ordinance for issuance of <br /> the permit unless we were to look at the standards for such signs in another district. <br /> For example, we could look to the standards for ground signs in the light industrial <br /> districts in Subdivision 6 or the standards for churches in the residential district in • <br /> Subdivision 8(3). Since the present situation illustrates the fact that there may <br /> indeed be requests for signs in the recreational/open space districts, this is <br /> something we obviously should clear up in recodifying the sign ordinance. <br /> It would be my recommendation that the Council make its best interpretation <br /> of the intention of the ordinance. That is, is it intended to prohibit signs in the <br /> recreational/open space districts, or is it appropriate that a permit for such signs be <br /> issued under Section 430:40, Subdivision 8 in the same manner as permits are <br /> issued for signs in the other districts? If the sign can be allowed by permit, the <br /> permit would be issued by the City Manager or his designee. If the Council <br /> concludes that the ordinance does not authorize the issuance of a permit froin the <br /> City Manager, the sign could be approved only with a variance. <br /> It is not easy to determine what the original intention of the ordinance ivas, <br /> but the Council will need to determine as best it can what was'intended. Again, this <br /> is an ambiguity we would.definitely want to clear up in the recodification of the sign <br /> ordinance. <br /> Very tr ly yours, <br /> f04 • <br /> William R. Soth <br /> WRS:ntk <br />