PL MINUTES 11171981 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-4- developed, and it is economically feasible for the owner of several lots north of this site .to do so, Mr.. Blanske will probably be in with a request for approval of a .development similar. to Mr. Johnson 's and the City will be consistent in making sidewalks a condition for approval of that proposal as well" . Mr. Jones also believes sidewalks in these areas will prove to be the impetus for Twin City Federal and Cadwallder Realty to provide the same improvements on their properties. Mr. .-Bowerman said one of. the reasons he believes the Johnson petition should .be tabled is because the third condition set by ordinance for granting a variance had not been satisfactorily addressed by the petitioner. He also questioned whether the City could require the developer to build sidewalks on land owned by the county. Motion. by Mr. Bjorklund and seconded Mr. Bowerman to table action on the November 9 , 1981 application from Sid Johnson for a variance to the City Zoning Ordinance which requires 4 ,000 square feet of lot area per townhouse unit, which will permit Mr. Johnson to construct, as proposed, 25 townhome units on Lot 12 , Block 1 , Penrod Addition, because no proponent appeared to answer questions the Commission considers vital to a Commission recommendatkon . regarding the variance . Voting on the .Motion: Aye: Bjorklund, Bowerman, Enrooth, Sopcinski and Makowske. Nay: Jones . Motion to table carried. A motion by Mr. Bjorklund and seconded by. Mr. Bowerman to commend Mrs . Makowske and Mr. Enrooth for "the contribution they made to the community welfare by agreeing to run for a Council seat" was with- drawn when a less formal indication of Commission appreciation was accepted as more practical. . Mr. Berg requested Commission members to give special attention to the definitions and last portion of the sign ordinance-he had distri- buted that evening, so they will be prepared to make comments and recommend modifications they consider appropriate at the next meeting. By that time he anticipates receiving the reaction of the City Attorney and sign consultants who will have reviewed the ordinance as well as from Jim Gahagen of the Chamber of Commerce. One thing he had noted, while developing the proposed ordinance , Mr. Berg said , was that, "There ' s no such thing as a perfect sign ordinance" . And, he is certain the City will have to continue to react individually to some sign requests . However, he views the new standards as pro- viding a better basis for approving or rejecting proposed signage . Mr. Berg told Mr. Sopcinski street frontage is established in the new ordinance as criteria for signage for smaller- stores which occupy space . formerly tenanted by larger operations , with frontage projected for those stores who don' t front on the street. The dis-