My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PL PACKET 12171996
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
1996
>
PL PACKET 12171996
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2015 5:33:16 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 5:33:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
20
SP Folder Name
PL PACKETS 1996
SP Name
PL PACKET 12171996
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
53
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
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes <br /> November 19, 1996 <br /> Page 7 <br /> I Commissioner Makowske withdrew his motion to ad oum. Chair Bergstrom concurred. <br /> 2 VILA,Review of Proposed Amendment to the OPUS Sign Plan for CUB Foods Store. <br /> 3 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated she had informed the applicant that he should be present at the meeting <br /> 4 this evening. <br /> 5 Commissioner Gondorchin stated he was in favor of granting the amendment to the sign plan. <br /> 6 Commissioner Delmonico stated he was in agreement. <br /> 7 Ms. Moore-Sykes explained that Rick Palmateerof Universal Signs had stated that the sign <br /> 8 standards for CUB Foods Stores had changed and it would be more costly to go back and create a <br /> 9 sign they no longer use. <br /> 10 Commissioner Franzese stated she was inclined to support approval of the amendment but felt <br /> 11 that the signs were excessive. <br /> 12 Commissioner Makowske stated he had concerns especially since no one was present to <br /> 13 represent the request. He felt therewas a comprehensive plan in place and the signage should <br /> 14 not be done "piece meal". He was concerned that a retailer on the other end of the mall would <br /> 15 come forward and request an amendment to their signage. <br /> 16 Chair Bergstrom also stated his concern of setting a precedent. He stated he did not feel a change <br /> 17 in corporate standards was a good reason to amend the comprehensive sign plan. <br /> 18 Commissioner Gondorchin stated he had been inclined to support the amendment at first because <br /> 19 he felt it was a unique situation at Apache Plaza. He would however, like to know the reason for <br /> 20 the change. He stated he felt a change in corporate standards was irrelevant. <br /> 21 There was Co mmission consensus that they were concerned because no one from Super Valu <br /> .22 appeared to answer the questions of the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission wants <br /> 23 to support the redevelopment of Apache Plaza but are concerned with the continued requests for <br /> 24 amendments to the comprehensive signage plan. The concerns of the Commission were <br /> 25 unanimous but the positions to support the amendment were divided. <br /> 26 Motion by Makowske, seconded by Bergstrom,to adjourn the meeting at 8:45 P.M. <br /> 27 Motion carried unanimously. <br /> 28 Respectfully submitted, <br /> 29 Lorri Kopischke <br /> 30 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.