CC PACKET 05091989 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I-3 Motion by Sundland, seconded by Makowske to approve payment of $1,988.40 to the Government Training Service as the consultant's fee plus travel expenses related to the January 20-21 Planning and Goal Setting Retreat. 4 Motion carried unanimously. 5 Motion by Marks, seconded by Makowske to approve payment of $4,542.35 6 to Hennepin County as the amount the City engineers calculated remained 7 for the County Road D Reconstruction Project. 8 Notion carried unanimously. 9 REPORTS 10 APRIL 5, 1989 PLANNING CONNISSION MINUTES PERTAINING TO HARDEES SIGN 11 VARIANCE REQUEST - CONNISSIONER TED BROWNELL 12 Variance Granted for Second Hardees Sign 13 Planning Commission Recommendation 14 Commissioner Brownell reported the applicant had requested a Council 15 decision on his variance be delayed until the April 25th meeting. The 16 Commission representative used the portions of the April 5th minutes 17 pertaining to this issue as well as design drawings of the proposed sign 18 as reference points in his report. He also indicated: a -The variance request was for a 37.1 square foot sign to be erected 20 on the south facing mansard roof in addition to the 76 square foot 21 freestanding sign which, in 1985, the restaurant owner had been 22 permitted by the City to take down from .the roof and install instead 23 on the southeast corner of his property close to Silver Lake Road. 24 -The restaurant would have a total of 107.1 square feet of signage 25 with the second sign where the City ordinance allows 150 square feet 26 of signage, but only one sign per establishment. 27 -The Commission had recommended with, a 3 to 2 vote that the variance 28 for the second sign be granted for the reasons reported in the 29 Commission minutes which the Commissioner summarized. 30 Councilmember Narks .commented that "state law says 'hardship' has to 31 result from what's written in the ordinance or is the nature of the 32 ordinance and/or the nature of the lot itself which makes it different 33 from other lots when it comes to shape, unusual topography, etc. and not 34 whether it's difficult to get business without the signage. " He asked 35 Commissioner Brownell whether the Commission had taken that into account 36 with their recommendation. 37 The Commissioner's response was that he perceived the majority of the 38 Commissioners were of the opinion that "the site did have unique 3