1999_0222_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

EXTRACT of DRAFT MINUTES of PLANNING COMMISSION iI1tEETiNG of 02.1 0.99: 6c. Planning File 3097. Lutheran Church of the Resurrection, 910 County Road D, request for a variance for a second freestanding monumenj sign. chair Rhody opened the hearirfg and requested a verbal summary from Dennis Welsch's February 10, 1 999, report. Ed Wolfe, represenbng the Church, described the Church's request. He noted the existing sign was installed in 1958. There is traffic on county Road D. The new sign is flexible and could include events at the church. Chair Rhody asked the Church what is the hardship'MMr. Wolfe said the signs are not visible from county Road D. The traffic moves quickly through the intersection. Member Wilke discussed spacing alternatives for signage along the building. Mr. Wolfe noted that direction for deliveries is important. Member Olson asked if driveway entrance signs are possible (yes). John Christenson, representing Resurrection Church, stated that the church site is very large and is being re- planted. The lot will not be seen by pass-by traffic without additional signage. Member Cunningham noted that the Montessori School is not affiliated with the Church. could a second sign be allowed? Chair Rhody closed the hearing. Chair Rhody explained that he found no hardship and there are viable alternatives. Motion: Member Cunningham moved, seconded by Member Mulder, to recommend denial of a second sign, because of lack of hardship pnc available alternatives. F Member Klausing described the dilemma} the ordinance is clear and states that one sign is allowed. He asked if the geography of the Church lot(large corner lot) necessitates more visibility. Member Wilke noted that moving the corner sign to the west would allow better visibility. There is some visibility hardship corning north on Victoria. Member Mulder asked if there was signage on the building (Yes). Motion carried 6-0. Ayes: Mulder, Olson, Cunningham, Rhody, Klausing,Wilke Nays; None