10-28-2015 City Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 28, 2015 ARCHITEC- TURAL REVIEW FOR SIGNAGE - 91 WEST VIKING DRIVE -- PLANNED PLANNED PARENTHOOD The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by McGraw. Ayes (5). Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted. Keis opened the public hearing to consider an Architectural Review for the relocation of a sign as well as aggregating allowed directional signage into a single sign location. The applicant is Planned Parenthood located at 91 West Viking Drive. The City Planner reviewed his October 2, 2015 report. He noted that Planned Parenthood is looking to change the sign layout from what was originally approved. The original sign plan included one monument sign on Viking Drive and wall signs on two sides of the building. The applicant is now seeing to change the monument sign to a directional sign and build a new freestanding sign near Highway 36 for better visibility. The Planner noted that the Code permits a maximum of 4 directional signs for a property with a maximum sign area of 4 square feet per sign. The applicant is asking the City to allow the directional signage to be aggregated into a single sign location on Viking Drive. The Planner reported that the new pylon sign proposed meets the City's architectural requirements. The Planner indicated that both planning staff and the Planning Commission have recommended approval of the requests. Montour noted the monument sign base that was installed along Rice Street, and asked the plans for that sign base. The City Planner indicated that the sign foundation was constructed as a location for a future sign. However, the applicant has no plans to use this sign base given that the pylon sign proposed will have visibility to Rice Street. Torkelson asked if the new pylon would be the same height as the Subway sign. The City Planner indicated that the heights will be close to the same. Fischer asked about removal of the monument sign base. Kurt Kaiser, Planned Parenthood, noted the discussion at the Planning Commission meeting that landscaping would be done around the sign base to mask its visibility. McGraw expressed concern about future confusion relative to this sign base and whether a sign would be allowed in this location. The City Planner indicated that to place a sign on the abandoned sign base would need Architectural Review requiring City Council approval. McGraw was concerned that over time this detail would be lost. Fischer stated that his preference is that the sign base be removed, and asked Planned Parenthood about their willingness to remove it. Kaiser stated 3