My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC MINUTES 09231980
StAnthony
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
1980
>
CC MINUTES 09231980
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2015 6:16:27 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 6:16:25 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
21
SP Folder Name
CC MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1980
SP Name
CC MINUTES 09231980
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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
-5- <br /> Planning Commissions, and thought. that. in that...time the. City- might <br /> have some firm plans from Horizon Mr. Fornell suggested an. app_ . <br /> cation could be -made which. would, include an agreement by.- Mr.. Hedlund, <br /> guaranteeing the remainder. of the, undeveloped lots will' be totally <br /> developed within their existing zoning parameters .within' no more <br /> than one building season if this proposal (beauty shop). is accepted, <br /> thereby realizing all the components of the. P..U.D.. ; first, the <br /> residential along Penrod Lane. wh.ich. is almost accomplished; secon:df, <br /> the barber shop, and finally, the immediate. development of the. <br /> remaining tract of land. Mayor Haik questioned whether present. <br /> economics might make such a plan unworkable but was willing to wait <br /> two weeks in which time staff could be authorized to work with <br /> Mr. Hedlund and Mr. Morris, to develop the detailed plan for the. <br /> Morris proposal which will include a firm proposal for development <br /> of the lots- to the north. Councilman Sundland' said he -"'wanted to <br /> see Mr. Morris have his day in court"' but was not interested in <br /> seeing '¬her fragmented plan from Mr. Hedlund "Mr. Morris said <br /> he understood fully what is expected of him and this delay would <br /> not interfere with his plans, <br /> The Council had requested staff to provide specifics for the <br /> signage permitted Sibley Catalog Showrooms as compared to that now <br /> requested for the Country- Store in the same building at 2500 - <br /> 38th Avenue N.E. in the Apache. Plaza shopping area. Mr. Berg <br /> reported that, as a replacement for the large non-conforming sign <br /> from a previous tenant, Sibley had been- permitted to have 450 square <br /> • feet of signage for the 50.,0.00 square foot area they occupy, <br /> including a 5 X 18 foot sign on the -south wall facing 37th Avenue <br /> N.E. In addition to the 3G8 square feet of signage already permitted <br /> Red Owl for the 30,000 square feet they occupy in the Country Store, <br /> the firm is now asking for a 5 X 56, foot sign on the south wall <br /> which will bring their total signage to. 588 square feet.. The <br /> existing sign ordinance allows 270 square feet, at most., for the <br /> Country Store. <br /> Mr. Sopcinski said the Planning Commission believed. the Red Owl <br /> application had not satisfactorily addressed the. three conditions <br /> set by ordinance for granting a variance to the sign ordinance for <br /> the additional 280 square foot sign. Mr. Soth read these three <br /> conditions. <br /> Bruce McKeever who is in charge of construction for- Red Owl and <br /> Douglas Goodard, architect, said the signage request was prompted <br /> by "the marketing people at Red Owl who have studied the sales of <br /> the Country Store for a long time. and concluded there has not been <br /> the projected response to sales promotions for that store and "the <br /> store is not getting the. customers who drive by" . Mr. Goodard noted <br /> that Sibley, with the existing large sign, has 705 square feet of <br /> signage and the possibility of that operation leaving the building <br /> because of bankruptcy "has just magnified Red Owl's need for <br /> identification in that isolated spot, especially considering the <br /> • absence of Montgomery Wards from the mall area" . The architect <br /> said he. had driven the area when the Planning Commission had questioned <br /> the feasibility of locating the sign on the south side of the build- <br /> ing, and agreed with Mr. McKeever "the only way a driverc�going east <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.