11-23-1982 PC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning COffimi s s ionr'li:::et:hng November 23, 1982 Page T1;o7O 4. Consider Variance Request - Larry Hennig Mr. Larry Hennig was present to ask the Planning Commission for a variance to the sign ordinance to allow' a larger sign than what is allow'ed. Rick Breezee explained to the Commission what the sign ordinance said about square footage requirements in relationship to lot frontage. Rick Breezee presented to the Commission a site drawing showing existing signage. :t-lr. Hennig stated that he removed QIl? sign and is replacing it \o7ith the ne\V sign, which is 4' x 20' in size. Commissioner Gunkel indicated that presently there are quite a few signs on that small building and questioned whether or not Mr. Hennig really wanted that many. Commissioner Gunkel aked Mr. Hennig if he would be willing to remove the smaller signs on the east side of the building (two signs); this way, he would not need a variance. Mr. Hennig stated that he would like to keep all of his signs and be granted the variance as he applied for. Commissioner Tralle agreed. with Commissioner Gunkel that this is a small building and further indicated that signs reflect the visual appearance of the to\vu as a whole. Commissioner Tralle could not see granting a variance for that large of sign. Mr. Hennig informed the Commission that he had an opportunity to"' trade signs with a gentleman from Monticello for a smaller size sign. Mr. Hennig further informed the Commission that it would only be over the requirement by 8 square feet. The Commission then discussed the size of the new sign and the location of it over- looking the parking lot. MOTION:.BY CO.MMlSSIONER TRALLE, SECONDED BY COM11ISSIONER KREUSER, TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE FOR ONLY 8 SQUARE FEET OF ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE TO MR. LARRY HE1~IG, 707 HIGH\\fAY 10. THE MOTION PASSED 3-0. 5. Consider Variance Request - Robert Morton Mr. Robert Morton was present to request a variance to the required side yard set- back for the placement of a pool within the setback. Mr. Morton explained to the Commission his difficulty in placing it any other place on his property. Mr. Morton referred ,to the -'mapthat:'was given to, the Planning Commission sho'\o7ing existing utility lines, trees, and a large reinforced slab that would have to be removed. Mr. Morton stated that quite a few structures within the immediate area fall within this required setback. Commissioner Gunkel explained that according to the variance procedure, five (5) findings have to be met before granting a variance. Commissioner Gunkel further stated that she does not believe a swimming pool is a family necessity and cannot