Laserfiche WebLink
-5- <br /> memo related to the St. Anthony .Court signage and agreed to present <br /> • the Planning Commission minutes at the Council ' s March 27th meeting. <br /> Commissioner Bjorklund then left the meeting. <br /> At 9 : 05 P.M. , the meeting was reconvened to consider the townhome <br /> identification signage. <br /> Motion by Commissioner Jones and seconded by Commissioner Hansen to <br /> move the agenda and take from the table the consideration of the <br /> signage which had been erected without a permit in front of the <br /> St. Anthony Court townhomes . <br /> The Manager had researched the files back to 1980 and hadincluded in <br /> the agenda packet minutes pertinent to .the Morris signage next to <br /> the townhomes and to the P.U.D. requirements for that signage. <br /> In his memorandum, Mr. Childs had listed seven different alternatives <br /> for Council action, including #4 advocated by Commissioner Bjorklund <br /> which would "require modification of the St. Anthony Court sign to a <br /> single , more acceptable sign, requiring the removal of the Morris <br /> sign" . Staff had recommended both uses have signs with design <br /> requirements recommended by the Commission and the Manager said he <br /> personally was inclined to require changes in the townhome signs due <br /> to their inadequate construction, which he perceives would not be in <br /> keeping with -community standards, than he was to changing the Morris <br /> sign. <br /> • Chester Krumm, who had recently been -selected by the townhome Owners <br /> Association to serve as one of three members of the Association Board <br /> of Directors, was again present to discuss the two. illegal signs which <br /> had been erected by the project contractor, Sid Johnson, before he <br /> sold the property. He indicated he knew little or nothing about the <br /> City's requirements for signage , about . the circumstances under which <br /> the existing signs had been erected, or how that signage related to <br /> the P.U.D. requirements for that tract of land. The other two Board <br /> members were gone for the winter, and Mr. Krumm indicated he did not <br /> expect both would be back in the City for a month or so. <br /> Mr. Krumm indicated he would get:..in touch with the Manager to discuss <br /> with him Mr. Johnson' s responsibility for getting sign approval for <br /> the existing signs and to ascertain just what type of signage would <br /> be acceptable to the City. Commissioner Jones observed that, , with the <br /> heavy snows this winter, even the non-conforming signs had been hard <br /> to see over the snow piled on the right-of-way. He suggested the <br /> Association might want to take advantage of the berming which the <br /> Rice Creek District had required Mr. .Johnson to construct in the front <br /> yard. The Commissioner also told the Association- representative , <br /> "at least you won't be cited for the illegal signage until the other <br /> Board members get back" . <br /> Motion by Commissioner Jones and seconded by Commissioner Wagner to <br /> put- back on the table the consideration' of �:the St. Anthony Court sign- <br /> age until the June. Planning Commission meeting, unless the St. Anthony <br /> Court Home Owners Association is able to come back before that time <br /> with. a proposal., which would better enhance and identify the site. <br /> Motion carried unanimously. <br />