PL PACKET 01191988 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. 1, Manager 'Indicates Sign .Erected on Front of Restaurant Since Hearing Is • 2 41 Square Feet Larger Than City Ordinance Allows - f i 3 The Chair continued the November 17th hearing at 7 : 42 P.M. by 4 requesting a staff report on the issues which were involved. 5 Mr . Childs said he understood the sign company had come to see Mr. 6 Hamer the day following the hearing when the Manager was not in his 7 office and the Building Inspector had issued a permit for an 82 square 8 foot sign based on calculations the sign company had made that they 9 needed 42 square feet for "Mickey" ; 6 square feet for "D" ; 4 square 10 feet for " ' S" ; 10-1/2 square feet for "Family" and 19 square .feet for 11 "Restaurant" . 12 The Manager then read that portion of St. Anthony' s Sign Ordinance 13 which states that signage should be calculated on the square- footage 14 of the rectangle enclosing all the sign lettering, which in this case, 15 he said would bring the sign surface up to 141 square feet, 41 square 16 feet more than the Ordinance would allow for this building with 17 approximately 50 feet of frontage and calling for a variance of that 18 much for the sign. 19 As he had stated at the hearing, the Building Inspector had consulted 20 him about the signage early in -October when the applicant were in Mr. 21 Hamer' s office. Without knowing the front dimensions, Mr. Childs said 22 he had advised Mr . Hamer the building would be allowed 2 square -feet 23 for every front foot. If the applicant wanted to keep the roof. sign or 24 put additional signage on the side of the building in addition to the 25 front sign-, he would have to apply for variances for that additional 26 signage because the .City Ordinance only allows one sign per business 27 with sometimes a variance for a second sign granted for .a. corner 28 business. 29 The November 17th minutes indicated that Tim Gow, the sign represen- 30 tative that evening, had given the Commissioners a drawing of an 8 X 8 31 foot sign reading "Mickey D' s" which the applicant wanted to put up 32 over one side of the "Mr. Hobo" roof sign and had been specifically -33 informed that-sign surface should actually be 64 square feet , accord- 34 ing to the ordinance calculations and not 27 square feet as indicated 35 in the October 30th letter from his company. 36 The minutes had also indicated that Commissioner Werenicz , noting the 37 discrepancies between what appeared to be .a 200 square foot sign from 38 the drawings submitted by the sign company and the applicant ' s 39 testimony that much less signage was being requested, as well. as the 40 disputed size -of the roof sign, * had suggested the applicant and his 41 sign company .:. sit down with staff to ascertain just what would 42 constitute acceptable signage for St. Anthony. • 2