My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1992 03 17
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1992 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1992 03 17
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:34 PM
Creation date
7/28/2005 11:25:15 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
3/17/1992
Original Hardcopy Storage
2E3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1992 03 17
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
restaurant on the same pad in the Louisville Plaza. Planning <br />Commission did review the request and recommended approval with <br />several conditions, as follows: <br /> <br />2. <br /> <br />3. <br /> <br />4. <br /> <br />No monument sign <br />Provide a guard rail between south entry and drive-up <br />lane <br />Provide warning signs regarding pedestrian crossing on <br />guard rail and drive-up lane <br />Provide noise strips on drive-up lane to alert drivers to <br />pedestrian crossing <br /> <br />Peter Cudlip with Louisville Plaza on behalf of Normar, Inc., <br />Burger King. <br /> <br />Cudlip: <br /> <br />We are requesting approval of the <br />final development plan for the <br />Burger King tonight. The site plan <br />Council is looking at tonight is <br />essentially the same plan as <br />Hardee's, which was approved a few <br />months ago. We were unable to close <br />with Hardee ' s, because of their <br />inability to find a strong <br />franchisee in the existing financial <br />market. We were successful in <br />finding a Burger King franchisee. <br />If we win your approval tonight, <br />he's ready to start within a week. <br />We would like to discuss with <br />Council the disapproval by Planning <br />Commission of the monument sign. It <br />was approved previously under the <br />Hardee ' s final development plan. <br />The monument sign requested by <br />Burger King is a little bit smaller <br />than the Hardee's sign. The reason <br />we didn't ask for a monument sign in <br />our original planning process is <br />because we didn't know who the <br />tenant would be. If we had sold an <br />acre site there, they would have <br />frontage on South Boulder Road. By <br />existing sign regulations they <br />would have been allowed up to a 14 <br />ft. high, 200 sq. ft. monument sign <br />there. They are requesting a <br />monument sign approximately 6 ft. by <br />6 ft. or 36 sq. ft. In addition, <br />the building frontage is <br />approximately 120 ft. back from the <br />street. If the monument sign is not <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.