Laserfiche WebLink
Board of Review -4- <br />Voting on main motion as .amended -- 5..ayes, 0 Hayes - carried <br />Councilman Hardt suggested that Anderson may be concerned since <br />this, is a -.form of reverse spec ial privilege. in that .this is a ,action <br />notapp-lied. to other ;signs. <br />Anderson stated that he felt this was negative special privilege <br />in that the-time period was ratherarbitrary since there-has been <br />no normal action taken. by the Councile <br />Fredrickson suggested that perhaps Councilman Hardt could <br />communicate to the .Council that Planning Commission wouldappreciate <br />some direction in matters. such as ths< <br />Gouncilman'Hardt noted that the Council is holding a public hearing <br />on June 17, to consider a sign amortization ordinance. <br />Mr. Nolan stated that while he is grateful for the..Planning <br />Commission recommending approval of the variance, he is somewhat <br />scared to exercise the variance under the conditions recommended. <br />He indicated that it may be better to wait for the Council to act <br />on the amortization ordinance. <br />Partyka indicated to the applicant that the Planning Commission- <br />is only an advising body. <br />Mr. Nolan indicated that if the. Council applied the recommended <br />conditions they would p robably once again let the variance expire. Mr. <br />Nolan asked if there wasn't some other. way to resolve the problem. <br />Wickland usggested that the best course of action may be to ga <br />directly to the Council now with the request as presented. Wickland <br />indicated that in his opinion, the Council has a much greater degree <br />` of judgement to apply to this case than does the Planning Commission. <br />" Fredrick reiterated that the Planning Commission is only advisory <br />and that the Council will make the final decision. <br />