My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC MINUTES 12081987
StAnthony
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
1987
>
CC MINUTES 12081987
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2015 5:46:36 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 5:46:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
21
SP Folder Name
CC MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1987
SP Name
CC MINUTES 12081987
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
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
1 *having worked with and written signage ordinances in Minnesota <br /> 2 and other states the past 15 years, had a hard time seeing how <br /> 3 anyone who worked with signs on a regular basis, could poss- <br /> 4 ibly have calculated square footage in the manner which had <br /> 5 been proposed; <br /> 6 *reiterated that in terms of municipal ordinances with possibly <br /> 7 the exception of signage for large commercial retail develop- <br /> 8 ments, he had never seen square footage calculated like this; <br /> 9 *was especially concerned that this signage had been ordered <br /> 10 long before the application for a variance had been made; <br /> 11 *wanted the Council to know it had always been staff' s policy not <br /> 12 to make any prediction about the likelihood of getting a vari- <br /> 13 ance except to let persons who wanted variances know their <br /> 14 chances of getting variances would be very slim if that seemed <br /> 15 to be likely. <br /> 16 <br /> 17 Councilmember Makowske: <br /> 18 *indicated she personally was very concerned about the effect <br /> 19 granting a variance of this size might have on the City' s <br /> 20 attempts to get some resolution for the excessive signage on <br /> 21 the Dairy Queen; <br /> •22 *was told by Mr. Childs the final decision would be up to the <br /> 23 Council of course, but the Planning Commission had already <br /> 24 indicated to the owner that they were prepared to look favorably <br /> 25 on a variance for the excessive signage if he came in to make an <br /> 26 application, which unfortunately, in spite of threats of legal <br /> 27 action, he had failed to do. <br /> 28 Those favoring a variance had the following to say about their <br /> 29 decision: <br /> 30 Councilmember Ranallo: <br /> 31 *indicated the reason he had made the comment about the final <br /> 32 decision having to be made by the Council was to emphasize to <br /> 33 the applicants that signage should never have been ordered <br /> 34 without Council approval; <br /> 35 *told Mr. Gow he continued to believe he knew what he was doing <br /> 36 all along; <br /> 37 *indicated he perceived some changes in staff procedures would <br /> 38 have to be made to avoid future misunderstandings; but <br /> 39 *since errors on both sides had occurred, said he would like to <br /> 40 see the business community get a break if at all possible. <br /> 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.