Laserfiche WebLink
<br />---., <br /> <br />Saturday, April 16, 1988 fran 6:00 p.m. to 12:00 midnight at the Party <br />House, 9539 Higmvay#lO N.W. <br /> <br />5) Introduction of ordinance amending Chapter 110 of the City Code <br />regarding regulations for keeping vicious dogs. <br /> <br />6) Introduction of ordinance amending Chapter 110 of the City Code <br />regarding regulations for keeping horses was removed from the Consent <br />Agenda. Please refer to p3.ge 14 for further action. <br /> <br />7) Adopt Resolution #88-42 authorizing the l-1ayor and City Administrator to <br />execute an amendment to a joint powers agreement with the County of <br />Anoka for the distribution of landfill abatement funds. (Please refer <br />to resolution file for Resolution #88-42). <br /> <br />z.k>tion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Reimann, Councilmembers Pearson, Cox <br />and DeLuca. Voting No: None. Absent: Councilmember Sorteberg. <br /> <br />COUNCIL BUSINESS <br /> <br />Case #1: Request For Conditional Use Permit To Construct Advertising <br />Sign: Case Of Bree~ D.ltdoor. Inc.: <br /> <br />l."ls. Norris recalled that City Council reviewed this request to construct an <br />advertising sign at 7009 Hwy. #10 on February 24 and tabled action pending <br />a presentation of the Highway #10 Corridor Study. <br /> <br />Mr. Goodrich stated that the issue appears to be whether the applicant <br />needs to provide copy of what will be advertised on the sign to insure it <br />complies with Section 170.054 of the City Code which states that signs are <br />permitted only on parcels where the activity advertised is located or <br />vdthin 2500 feet of the p3.rcel on which the subject activity is located. <br /> <br />Polly Shovein - Breezy CXItdoor, Inc. - Stated that Breezy Outdoor agrees to <br />comply with the 2500 foot regulation regarding advertising signs. Breezy <br />D.ltdoor understands that it would take an ordinance amendment to be able to <br />advertise an activity not within 2500 feet of the sign location. Ms. <br />Shovein stated that she has not been able to find any language in the <br />ordinance that requires providing sign copy prior to the issuance of a sign <br />permit and noted that advertising sign copy changes frequently. <br /> <br />11r. Goodrich noted that it would be difficu1 t to change advertising copy <br />frequently when it is limited to an activity within 2500 feet of the <br />parcel on which the sign is located. Mr. Goodrich stated that it is <br />reasonable for Council to expect the applicant to sul:mit advertising copy. <br /> <br />Counci1nanber Cox stated that t..'1e intent of Ramsey's sign ordinance was to <br />allcw business owners along Hv.'Y. f10 the option to have an advertising sign <br />along the highway corridor. <br /> <br />v~. Shovein - stated that regulating the sign's content to an activity <br />within 2500 feet of the sign is a form censorship and a first amendment- <br />type issue. <br /> <br />City Council/~.arch 8, 1988 <br />Page 5 of 14 <br /> <br />3)..- <br />