Laserfiche WebLink
replat one lot(East)to be 5,625 square feet and the other(West)to be 3,750 square feet in size. <br /> Both of these lot sizes are contrary to the provisions of Section 106-333 (a),which requires single <br /> family detached lots to be a minimum of 6,000 square feet in size. <br /> Second by T.J. Walker. Motion Failed. <br /> Ayes: Dennis Oian <br /> Nays: Rod Rothermel,T.J.Walker, and Chester Pool <br /> Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins read from Section 106-196 of the Code of Ordinances: <br /> Appeals from the Board of Adjustment. <br /> 5. A public hearing will be held to consider Variance Request 16-93000013, a request by Jose <br /> Gonzalez for the tract of land located at 324 W. Main Street, legally described as Lots 11, &12 <br /> Block 58 Town of La Porte Subdivision.The applicant is seeking approval of a variance that <br /> would allow his client to place a freestanding sign in the Main Street District that is 50 square <br /> feet in size, and is 24 feet in height for an existing building that is not setback.This is contrary <br /> to Section 106-874(a)(4)(c)which requires that new freestanding signs can only be used when <br /> the building is setback and cannot exceed 24 square feet in size or 14 feet in height <br /> Chairman Rothermel opened the public hearing at 6:25. <br /> a. Staff Presentation <br /> Planning Tech. Cramer presented staff's report for variance request 16-93000013. <br /> The applicant is moving into an existing building on Main St.and would like to erect a free <br /> standing sign. New free standing signs in the Main Street Overlay District are only <br /> permitted when the building is setback off of the road. This building is not. <br /> b. Applicant Presentation <br /> The applicant was not present. <br /> c. Public Comments <br /> There were no public comments. <br /> Chairman Rothermel closed the public hearing at 6:29 PM. <br /> d. Question and Answer <br /> Rod Rothermel noted that there is an existing pole but that the business address in <br /> question was not on the list of previously existing poll signs along Main St. <br /> Chester pool stated that he was not happy with the proposed height but was okay with <br /> the proposed size of the sign cabinet. <br />