Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ROSEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION <br />May 8, 1991 <br /> <br />Paget <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />Thomas asked for clarification as to how the sign does not conform <br />to City Code. Shardlow said that a sign is considered a structure <br />and as such, it must meet appropriate setback requirements and this <br />sign does not. <br /> <br />Wietecki questioned what constitutes a hardship. Shardlow replied <br />that some physical element that does not allow code compliance is <br />a hardship. <br /> <br />wietecki asked if financial implications are deemed hardships. <br />Shardlow explained that financial implications in and of themselves <br />are not considered hardships. <br /> <br />Harms indicated that the location of the sign, from a safety <br />standpoint, is not safe for vehicles coming out of the driveway on <br />the site. <br /> <br />DeBenedet closed the public hearing. <br /> <br />MOTION <br /> <br />Roberts moved and Stokes seconded to recommend denial of George <br />Brandt, Inc. 's request for a variance to the sign ordinance at 2975 <br />Long Lake Road based on the findings that no hardship is present <br />and because of the lack of supporting documentation by the <br />applicant. <br /> <br />Roll Call: <br /> <br />Ayes: <br /> <br />Thomas, Stokes, Goedeke, Roberts, <br />Wietecki, Harms, DeBenedet <br /> <br />Nayes: <br /> <br />None <br /> <br />DeBenedet asked that staff notify Mr. Brandt that this application <br />will go before the City Council on Tuesday, May 28, 1991. <br /> <br />Planninq File 2229 <br /> <br />Rottlund Company, Inc. request for planned unit development at 2400 <br />N. Dale Street. <br /> <br />Presentation <br /> <br />Shardlow explained to the Planning Commission that this is not a <br />formal hearing but a sketch plan review and only the concept and <br />key features of the proposal will be reviewed. Shardlow added that <br />the actual public hearing will take place at the regular June <br />Planning commission meeting. Shardlow outlined the current <br />proposal for the Concordia Academy site, the previous Brutger <br />Companies proposal, and the City's study of the development <br />potential of the site. <br />