My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SP-069
NewBrighton
>
Commissions
>
Commissions-OLD
>
PLANNING
>
Planning
>
Special Use Permit File PLZ 02100
>
SP 001-100
>
SP-069
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/15/2007 11:48:05 AM
Creation date
2/7/2007 11:54:33 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
53
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />4 <br /> <br />Inasmuch as the Constitutional provision of "due process of law" <br />requires that public hearings discuss all substantive issues <br />(see for example "Zoning Variances and the First Promise of the <br />American Creed"), any issues in regard to the conformance or non- <br />conformance of a special use permit to the intent of the district <br />standards, raised during the hearing require documentation as to <br />finding of the City Council regarding such issues--with reasons <br />stated. I will raise such issues later in this memo. <br /> <br />Let us now examine the specific intent of the New Brighton <br />Sign Ordinance. Section 14-200 "Special Considerations" paragraph <br />C.3. is the first specific reference to the problem at hand, it <br />states: <br /> <br />"Buildings having multiple occupancies with both individual <br />and shared entrances: The procedures to be followed shall <br />be as outlined in Section 14-180, Areas of Special Control." <br /> <br />Inasmuch as this paragraph indicates that the procedures to be <br />followed shall be as outlined in Section 14-180, it seems to leave <br />the question of standards open. Section 14-180 in paragraph a) <br />recognizes that regulations of the ordinance cannot sensitively <br />handle all the sign situations and authorizes the City Council to <br />designate areas of special control as follows: <br /> <br />a) Scenic Areas <br />b) Shopping Centers <br />c) Renewal Areas <br /> <br />Reading of the ordinance will convince one that the subject <br />property is neither a scenic area nor a renewal area. (Renewal <br />areas are defined as areas designated for renewal, redevelopment or <br />development or as development districts in accordance with the <br />procedures established in Minnesota Statutes.) The definition of <br />shopping center is as follows: <br /> <br />"Sh9Pping centers are more intensive commercial areas whose <br />character indicates that signs should be permitted which <br />differ from those which would otherwise be applicable under <br />this ordinance. A shopping center is a premise planned and <br />developed as a unit, with an undivided or non-segregated <br />parking area, that is advertised as a center and has multiple <br />occupancy by business or service firms. It may be either <br />of the following: a regional or community shopping center; <br />or a street intersection, square or similiar areas which <br />is devoted to intensive shopping uses provided that driving <br />speeds do not exceed 30 mph.1I <br /> <br />In my opinion the subject property qualifies as a shopping center. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.