PL MINUTES 12211965 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-2- 6. 2-6. Zoning Variation Mr. Mary Super presented for James Ledwein a request for two non-conforming commercial signs at 2550 Kenzie Terrace-one over existing sign on top of the building and one a free standing sign in front of the building. Upon motion by Howitz, seconded by ilesenbring it was moved to recommend to the Council that they approve the request for the roof sign but action on the free standing sign be tabled to be re-submitted after a specific location is chosen. At that time its effect on traffic movement and on the over all Kenzie area development study should be re-examined. 7. OLD BUSINESS Upon motion by Howitz seconded by P1esenbring it was moved to table action on revised rough draft copy of proposed sign ordinance until a Planning Board quorum was present. Motion Carried. 3. BUILDING PERMITS Mr. Joe Malot lessee of Dairy Queen, 2612 Highway #3, presented his plans to change roof style and add a 7'6" front foyer on existing structure. • Upon motion by Howitz, seconded by Mesenbring it was moved to recommend to the council to approve said plans. Motion Carried. Mr. Paul Johnson presented revised plot plan for 36 unit apartment building proposed for 3311 Hacalaster Drive which includes 20 garages and a swimming pool . Board member Hesenbring noted plot plan includes an access road to 39th Avenue which was contested by neighbors at the original planning discussion of this development. it was moored Upon motion by Howitz,seconded by Mesenbring/to recommend to the Council to approve said revised plot plan except access road to 39th Avenue. Motion Carried. Q. MISCELLANEOUS Mr. Wegner, prepresenting Robert Lohmar, present his request for vacation of a rublic road easement lying north and south on the east ten feet of Lot 16, Block 5, Clark & Kings 1-iennep i n Gardens (2512 Anthony Road). Mr. tlegner's c?fent does not yet own the property, but desires to purchase it if the ease- ment_ can be removed. Mr. llegner has examined subject property and adjoining pro;ierties and can find no practical reason for its existance. Mr. Uleciner • ,•urtner indicated Village action is necessary before the district court will consider action -on. sei4;y;,cation. 7 Upon motion by Howitz seconded by Mesenbring it was moved to recommend to the council to take the necessary action to remove this easement.