My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PL PACKET 09192000
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
2000
>
PL PACKET 09192000
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2015 7:38:00 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 7:37:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
27
SP Folder Name
PL PACKETS 2000-2004
SP Name
PL PACKET 09192000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
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
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes <br /> August 15, 2000 <br /> Page 2 <br /> 1 Motion carried unanimously. <br /> 2 . III. COMMUNICATION FROM CITY COUNCIL. <br /> 3 None. <br /> 4 IV. REQUESTS FOR POSTPONEMENTS OR WITHDRAWAL OF APPLICATIONS. <br /> 5 None. <br /> 6 V. NEW APPLICATIONS/PUBLIC HEARINGS. <br /> 7 A. Public Hearing Petition for Variance Murphy's Service Center. <br /> 8 Chair Bergstrom opened the public hearing at 7:12 p.m. and requested a report from Staff. <br /> 9 Assistant City Manager Spencer Isom noted that the applicant, Richard C. Graff, is seeking to re- <br /> 10 place the business sign at his Conoco gas station located at 3501 29th Avenue NE. The gas sta- <br /> 11 tion is a commercial business located in a L 1 zoning district. The proposed sign exceeds allow- <br /> 12 able dimensions for L1 zoning. However, it is within the allowable dimensions had his land <br /> 13 been zoned Cl. The land has been used for a gas station since 1958. Mr. Graff has owned the <br /> 14 business since 1973 and,therefore, the land is deemed to be "grandfathered." Staff has discussed <br /> 15 this issue with City Attorney Soth and it was decided that the conditions supporting a variance do <br /> 16 exist. <br /> �17 Isom noted, however, that upon review of the zoning ordinance,his assessment was incorrect, <br /> 18 and that it is not a question of the dimension, but rather that type of sign being allowed in the L1 <br /> 19 district. A pylon sign is allowed in a C district. <br /> 20 Bergstrom confirmed that pylon signs are not allowed in a L1 district; however, upon recommen- <br /> 21 dation by City Attorney Soth in a previous discussion,the sign would be "grandfathered" in <br /> 22 under prior zoning districts. <br /> 23 Isom acknowledged that because of the zoning requirements, Mr. Graff was required to appear <br /> 24 before the Planning Commission to request a new sign. <br /> 25 Mr. Graff relayed to the Commission the same facts that he had presented at the Concept Review <br /> 26 at a prior meeting. The current sign was damaged by a truck over Memorial Day weekend, and it <br /> 27 has been determined that the sign cannot be repaired. <br /> 28 Hanson inquired of Mr. Graff if the new sign would be in the same location as the current sign. <br /> 29 Mr. Graff explained the location of the sign,which was essentially the same as it is currently, and <br /> 30 detailed the dimensions and structure of the new sign. <br /> 31 Hanson inquired if the sign would be lit at all hours. Mr. Graff responded that the sign would be <br /> 32 lit up all day and night and there would actually be floodlights towards the sign. <br /> 1033 Chair Bergstrom closed the public hearing at 7:19 p.m. and asked for Commission input. <br /> 34 Tillmann noted that the new sign looked better than the old sign. The other Commissioners <br /> 35 agreed. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.