Laserfiche WebLink
<br />o <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />Elk River Planning Commission <br />May 24, 1983 <br />Page Four <br /> <br />Chairman Tracy indicated that Mr. Lindquist has responded to the five standards <br />but questioned whether his situation was a hardship. <br /> <br />Rick Breezee indicated that a hardship is an individual situation. <br /> <br />After some discussion, it was agreed that there was a hardship in Mr. Lindquist's <br />situation. <br /> <br />A MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER WILLE TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT <br />THE VARIANCE REQUEST MADE BY MR. RICHARD LINDQUIST BE APPROVED. COMMISSIONER <br />PEARCE SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 6-0. <br /> <br />6~. Ken iBeaudry' (Skelly) Interpretation of Sign Ordinance <br /> <br />Mr. Ken Beaudry of Skelly was present and stated he needed an interpretation of <br />the Sign Ordinance as specified in nonconforming use. Mr. Beaudry indicated that <br />Skelly is changing their name to Getty as of July 1st, and therefore, he needs <br />to replace his Skelly sign which is 50 square feet in measurement. <br /> <br />Rick Breezee stated that the Code reads "at the time a new sign is to be put up, <br />all existing signs must be taken down." The question now being, is Mr. Beaudry's <br />sign a new sign or just a replacement. <br /> <br />After some discussion it was the consensus of the Planning Commission that Mr. <br />Beaudry's sign is a replacement and not a new sign. <br /> <br />A MOTION WAS MADE B.Y COMMISSIONER WILLE STATING THAT MR. KEN BEAUDRY IS IN COM- <br />PLIANCE WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE 900.34, SUBSECTION 2b. COMMISSIONER PEARCE <br />SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 6-0. <br /> <br />7. Private Roads <br /> <br />Phil Hals, City Street Superintendent, and Terry Maurer, Consulting Engineer from <br />CED, were present for this item. <br /> <br />Rick Breezee explained to the Commissioners that at the last Council Meeting the <br />private roads in Heavenly Hills were discussed and that the people were in favor <br />of having the City take over the roads. Mr. Breezee further explained that there <br />were other private roads in the City and the concern whether the City should take <br />over these roads, and who should maintain them. <br /> <br />Ii MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER OSTER THAT THERE BE NO. MORE PRIVATE ROADS TN THE <br />CITY AND THAT THE EXISTING PRIVATE ROADS BE TAKEN OVER BY THE CITY IF 51% OF THE <br />PEOPLE AGREE. COMMISSIONER WARD SECONDED THE MOTION. THE THE MOTION WAS NOT <br />VOTED UPON. <br /> <br />At this time the Commissioners discussed the questionnaire they had received on <br />roads by Staff, with Terry Maurer. <br />