Laserfiche WebLink
1 perceived the City' s options were limited by the fact the <br /> 2 sign is already up and paid for; <br /> 3 wouldn't vote to bring the signage any further over the <br /> 4 amount allowed by the ordinance; <br /> 5 said he would approve the sign as it sits and that would <br /> 6 be it. <br /> 7 Wagner: said he could go along with staff' s recommendation to split <br /> 8 the front sign into two signs with one put on the east side <br /> 9 if the owner really felt the need for two exposures. <br /> 10 Hansen: indicated he could go along with that suggestion; <br /> 11 added that if the sign company had taken more time for more <br /> 12 discussions with the City, that could have been done from <br /> 13 the start, eliminating some of the work which is already <br /> 14 done. <br /> 15 Franzese: agreed the City had to accept the front sign as approved, <br /> 16 however, perceived the Commission' s charge was also to <br /> 17 encourage commercial activity; and <br /> 18 <br /> 19 perceived there might be a need for signage on the east <br /> 20 side as well as the front of the building to catch the <br /> 01 attention of anyone driving south on 88 or coming across <br /> 22 the bridge from St. Paul who cannot see the sign which is <br /> 23 already up; <br /> 24 <br /> 25 but did not see the need for the big sign on the top <br /> 26 because any sign on that side of the building would have <br /> 27 visibility; <br /> 28 believed that whether moving the words "Family Restaurant" <br /> 29 to the east side, or what, some identification was neces- <br /> 30 sary within the realm of helping them do a good business <br /> 31 and succeed in that location. <br /> 32 Childs: reiterated for the benefit of the sign company representa- <br /> 33 tive that the way he saw it was that the Planning Commission <br /> 34 had met on the 17th and discussed fully just how the ordin- <br /> 35 ance would calculate the square footage on the drawing they <br /> 36 had presented for the front sign, pointing out to them that <br /> 37 perhaps their calculations were wrong and the next day they <br /> 38 went in and applied for a permit for a sign, using the <br /> 39 same calculations. <br /> 40 <br /> 41 indicated he was willing to take the responsibility for <br /> 42 the staff error and for handling it with the Building <br /> • 7 <br />