Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mr. Goodrich replied that Ramsey's ordinance is not restricting freedom of <br />speech but intended only to reasonably restrict placement of signs in the <br />City. <br /> <br />) <br /> <br />Mayor Reimarm stated he was on the Planning and Zoning Commission when the <br />ordinance was written and confirmed that the intent of it was as <br />Councilnanber Cox stated. <br /> <br />Mr. Hartley inquired if it is Breezy Qltdoor' s intention to advertise the <br />business or products that are available at the business on the prot:erty. <br /> <br />Ms. Shovein stated that Breezy OUtdoor would like to discuss whether <br />advertising products sold on the prot:erty is a possibility considering the <br />way the ordinance reads. Ms. Shovein stated that other communi ties have <br />signs advertising Ramsey businesses and Breezy Qltdoor would like to open <br />the discussion on Ramsey amending it's ordinance to allow for the same. <br /> <br />Council rfN iewed and amended the proposed findings of fact as follCMS: <br /> <br />Mr. Goodrich inquired as to Breezy Qltdoor's intent if a customer for the <br />advertising sign cannot be found within 2500 feet of the sign. <br /> <br />;"k:,;o Shovein replied that she does not know what avenue Breezy Qltdoor would <br />then follow; the cornfany does not generally construct a sign until there is <br />a custaner. Ms. Shovein stated that she has reviewed the findings of fact <br />and all of the facts she brought forth have been included. Ms. Shovein <br />reiterated that Breezy Qltdoor will live within the 2500 foot requireIIlent; <br />if not, the City can force the removal of the sign. <br /> <br />Mr. Goodrich stated that his purpose in resolving all issues at this time <br />is to avoid a situation where the owner of the sign violates ordinance, <br />refuses the city's request to have the sign removed and the city incurs <br />legal fees forcing the removal of the sign. <br /> <br />Mr. Goodrich suggested adding a finding of fact indicating that the <br />applicant has stated that the advertising copy will not necessarily be the <br />princip:il activity which occurs on the site. <br /> <br />Ms. Shovein disagreed with lIJI. Goodrich's suggestion for a finding of fact <br />noting that Breezy Outdoor has stated they will comply with ordinance <br />requirements. <br /> <br />Council amended the proposed findings of fact by adding the follCMing: <br /> <br />*19. '!hat the Applicant has stated that it is their intention is to <br />advertise products sold on the site or within 2500 feet of the <br />site. <br /> <br />#20. The subject of the advertising CO~T is not knov.1J1 at this time. <br /> <br />#21. The advertising CORY shov.1J1 on the site will cha'1ge f rom time to <br />time. <br /> <br />#22. That the Applicant has stated that the principal advertising on <br />City Council/lI.Larch 8, 1988 <br /> <br />Page 6 of 14 <br /> <br />33 <br />