Agenda - Council - 01/26/1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I I I '1 I I I I I I I I I I I 9. That the Applicant's proposal exceeds the number of ground signs by one and one of the signs exceeds the sign size restriction by 12 square feet. 10. That the Applicant is proposing to have the signs back lit. 11. That the intent of the one sign per parcel rule was to eliminate sign clutter. 12. 'U xt the Applicant's parcel is exceptionally large and had the property been platted into one acre industrial lots in accordance with City Code regulations, there would be a potential for 40 business identification signs on the Subject Property. 13. That the City has previously approved exceeding the sign size restrictions in the commercial districts. 14. That if granted, the conditional use permit will not grant the Applicant special privileges that are denied by the City Code to other properties in the commercial area. 15. That the proposed increase in number of signs and sign surface will be designed so as to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the vicinity and will not change the essential character of the area. 16. That the proposed increase in sign surface will not adversely impact traffic in the area. 17. That the proposed increase in sign surface will not be unduly dangerous or otherwise detrimental to persons residing or working in the vicinity of the use or to the public welfare. 18. That the proposed increase in sign surface will not substantially adversely impair the use, enjoyment, or market value of any surrounding property. 19. That the proposed increase in sign surface will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses. 20. That the proposed increase in sign surface will not create excessive additional reqUirement~'at' public cost for public facilities and services, and it will/will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 21. That the proposed increase in sign surface will not involve activities and uses that will be d~trimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of glare. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: and the following abstained: RESOLUTION #99-01- Page 2 of 3