Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> .' . <br /> Minutes of Regular Council Meeting <br /> Dec. 13, 1982 <br /> Page Four <br /> Proposed Amendment to Me tro Council Water Resources Development <br /> Guide Dealing with Sewage Treatment and Handling <br /> Council authorized Christoffersen to attend the Public Hearing on <br /> behalf of Arden Hi lIs. (Mee ting is scheduled at 2:00 p.m. on <br /> Jan. 6. 1983 in the Metropolitan Council Chamber, 300 Metro Square <br /> Bui lding. 7th and Robert Streets.) <br /> Case No. 82-23, Sign Setback Variances - Cardiac Pacemakers, Inc. <br /> Woodburn referred Council to Planning Memo (11-18-82) and Planning <br /> Commission recommendations (Minutes 12-1-82) <br /> The Planning Commision's recommendation of whether the proposed , <br /> signs are "directional" or "bus iness tl was queried. Jack Moore <br /> ( CP I) said the purpose of the signs is "directional", but the <br /> area of the signs under construction,exceeds the "directional <br /> sign" size maximum. <br /> After review of the colored sketch of the proposed signs, and dis- <br /> cussiont McAllister moved, seconded by Hicks. that Council approve <br /> a 25' setback variance for the proposed "business II sign at the <br /> County Road F CPI entrance drive, as per sketCh presented. Mo tion <br /> carried unanimous ly (5-0) . <br /> McAllister moved, seconded by Hicks, that Council deny the setback <br /> variance for the "business sign" proposed at the CPI Fernwood en- <br /> trance drive. Motion carried unanimoUSly (5 -0) , <br /> Case No. 82-24 Minor Subdivision - Herbert S, Johnson Com anies <br /> (3 lot subdivision at New Brighton Road and Stowe Avenue . <br /> Council was referred to Planning Memo 01-18-82 ) and Planning Com- <br /> mission re commenda tions (Minutes of 12-1-82) . <br /> After discussion, Mulcahy moved, seconded by Hicks, that Council <br /> approve the 3 lot resubdivision as proposed (Survey dated 11-3-82. <br /> prepared for Patrick Finn), recognizing the variance on one lot <br /> from the requirement of full lot frontage on a pub lic street. <br /> Motion carried unanimously (5-0) . <br /> Licenses for Amusement Arcades and Coin Operated Amusement Devices <br /> Council was referred to recommendations of the Finan ce Commi t tee <br /> (Minutes of 12-9-82), recommending the following fees: <br /> Amusement Arcade <br /> $120.00/year plus $30 for each device from the fourth <br /> through the tenth, and $60 for each device above the tenth. <br /> $1.230/year maximum. <br /> Amusemen t Devices <br /> (whether a part of arcade or other establishment) <br /> $40/device in 1983 <br /> $60/device in 1984 <br /> After discussion. McAllister moved that Council adopt Resolution <br /> No. 82-67, ESTABLISHING FEES FOR AMUSEMENT ARCADES AND COIN . <br /> OPERATED AMUSEMENT DEVICES AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 82-41. <br /> Motion was seconded by Hicks. <br /> In further discussion, it was noted tha t it has been our tendency <br /> in the pas t to review all fees pe riodi cally; Finance Committee had <br /> previously anticipated re-evaluation of all fees for 1984 permits/ <br /> 1icenaes. <br /> Hicka moved, seconded by Johnson, to amend Resolution No. 82-67, <br /> ID include eatablishment of fees for 1983 only; 1984 feea to be re- <br /> evaluated with other permit/license fees for 1984. Mo tion carried <br /> unanimously. (5-0) . <br /> Motion as amended, approving Resolution No. 82-67 carried unan- <br /> imous ly. (5-0) . <br /> -4- <br />