Laserfiche WebLink
• 1 Councilmember Enrooth told the sign representative that he perceived <br /> 2 the sad thing in this case was that if the signage had been done <br /> 3 properly, there would probably have been no problem getting a second <br /> 4 sign because of the restaurant' s corner location. He and Councilmem- <br /> 5 ber Marks both commented that they perceived the City' s complicity in <br /> 6 the error had to be taken into account as well. <br /> 7 Councilmember Ranallo underscored that the Commission had only <br /> 8 "recommended" the Council give the applicants the extra 41 square feet <br /> 9 on the front which with the 64 square feet on the roof sign, actually <br /> 10 represented a variance for 105 square feet, almost double what the <br /> 11 ordinance allowed. <br /> 12 Council Swayed by Photos of Building From Three Roadways <br /> 13 After seeing the above and hearing Mr. Gow say all the electrical for <br /> 14 the front sign was housed in the roof sign, which had already been <br /> 15 made up, some of the Councilmembers indicated a different perspective <br /> 16 on the issue: <br /> 17 Ranallo: indicated he could see from the photos that the restaurant <br /> 18 would be "completely naked on one side" ; <br /> 19 Marks: told Mr. Farrell the Council certainly wanted him to be <br /> •20 successful; <br /> 21 agreed the photos illustrated lack of identification from <br /> 22 Highway 88. <br /> 23 Makowske: indicated she wanted assurance that there would be no other <br /> 24 copy except "Mickey D' s" on the roof sign and no other <br /> 25 types of signage including window signs on the restaurant. <br /> 26 Roof Sign Allowed by 4 to 1 Vote <br /> 27 Motion by Ranallo, seconded by Marks to approve the Planning commis- <br /> 28 sion findings related to the front sign on Mickey D' s Family Res- <br /> 29 taurant, 2905 Kenzie Terrace, and to grant an additional variance to <br /> 30 allow the proposed 64 square foot sign to be erected on the east side <br /> 31 only of the existing roof sign structure with no other signage on the <br /> 32 building at all. <br /> 33 Before the vote was taken, the following objections were raised: <br /> 34 Mr. Childs: <br /> 35 *indicated he was not denying staff had made a mistake by accept- <br /> 36 ing erroneous calculations of square footage for the proposed <br /> 37 signage; but <br /> • <br /> 11 <br />