My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
1993_0426_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
1993
>
1993_0426_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/1/2011 9:23:28 AM
Creation date
10/18/2011 11:58:06 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
183
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
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 4 _ 6 �9 3 <br />ITEM N0 0 ; t <br />Department Approval: Manager Reviewed* Agenda section. <br />Reports and <br />Recommendations <br />Item Description: S 11, gncrafters Inc. request for a variance at <br />2775 Highway 35N (McCarthy's Oldsmobile GKC) <br />act r u d: <br />is The City's s ign ordinances were recently amended and reduced <br />the maximum height of a pylon sign from 25 feet to 20 feet in <br />the B -3 zoning district. The sign regulations also require <br />that pylon signs be setback 30 feet from a property line <br />adjacent to a street. <br />igncrafters Inca, on behalf of McCarthyts Oldsmobile G C, is <br />requesting a variance to allow a pylon sign to be 28 feat <br />tall and for a setback variance to match other existing signs <br />in the area, <br />3. The Roseville Planning Commission unanimously recommended <br />denial of the variance request based on theme being no <br />hardship present, that the City has worked hard to adopt new <br />sign regulations and the city should be working to bring <br />properties into compliance with the new regulationis. The <br />Planning commission, in a separate motion, requested that <br />the city Council reevaluate it's decision to not adopt <br />ordinance revisions to amortize existing non conforming <br />signs over a ten year period based on this case and the - need <br />to bring signs -in conformance with the new regulations over <br />times <br />Al to rnat iv-es IS <br />1. Approve the variance request based on the finding that a <br />hardship exists to justify the variance. <br />2. Deny the variance based on the finding that no hardship is <br />present on the site to justify the variance.. <br />Pol i v Qbi ectivgsi <br />1. To insure that development occurs consistent with the City's <br />zoning and sign ordinances. <br />To grant variances where hardships eist on the site <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.