My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06 - Planning and Zoning Monthly Report
Laserfiche
>
City Council (Permanent)
>
Agenda Packets (Permanent)
>
2012
>
08-07-2012 Council Meeting
>
06 - Planning and Zoning Monthly Report
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/7/2014 5:51:44 PM
Creation date
12/19/2013 3:35:25 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
flashing and revolving, portable and digital, without a Conditional Use Permit, on any lot <br />`.., in town without any restrictions or public input. The Off-Site restriction would have <br />been removed allowing any sign on any lot. It did not pass, but may come up again. <br />Mr. Burslie explained last month there was confusion regarding Sign Concept Plans. <br />Commercial property owners wanting more signage can apply for a Conditional Use <br />Permit, notices are sent to neighbors and the newspaper, and a public hearing is held. It <br />is costly to the applicant; $450 for a commercial Conditional Use Application. <br />Residential property owners could not apply for a Sign Concept Plan. <br />The amendment is for any property in town, not just commerc' ut fees, etc. The <br />proposed change was added to the General section. Staff re ends approval of the <br />amendment which gives the Planning Commission the a' y t w more signage. <br />Chairman Pederson stated that costs are incurred b 't� to go t the process <br />and the fee is not profit for the City. There wou till be the $100 Sig it fee. <br />Mr. Adams stated that the City will still have cos oci• <br />such as paperwork, Staff time, etc. The fee is too hi <br />such as $100. Mr. Adams further st that he is com <br />for Commercial districts, but residenti may need a <br />may have concerns. Residential areas s�9 <br />lose that opportunity without a Conditio <br />� notified. Mr. Snyder conc ed. <br />Mrs. Seils stated th Condit 1 Use Per <br />Staff stated nei�h or be n ied of the <br />� <br />hearing. <br />Staff st that ti <br />need received <br />the wi be incl <br />Most busine r home <br />to do a business, si�n <br />an <br />in <br />Use <br />�ith the Sig oncept Plan <br />• fee might be appropriate, <br />having the concept review <br />� fr m neighbors; residents <br />for public input; we <br />. Neighbors need to be <br />or a Variance require a public hearing. <br />t Plan without holding a public <br />Notices need to be mailed out. Applications would <br />f the Planning Commission meeting Agenda <br />in a residential zone need a Conditional Use Permit <br />is not always part of those initial thoughts. <br />Staff was directed to�`ing back an amendment including the following: <br />• Separate residential and commercial standards; <br />• Notification of neighbors in residential zone, no notification in commercial zone; <br />• Eliminate Conditional Use Permit for all zones; <br />• Make recommendation to change Fee Schedule. <br />A motion was made by Bill Habein, seconded by Tom Adams, to table this ordinance <br />amendment until the suggested revisions are completed. <br />Minutes 2 <br />Pequot Lakes Planning Commission <br />July 19, 2012 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.