03-14-2013 Planning Comm. Minutes

Home Browse Search

MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 14, 2013 indicated that a detailed signage plan could be submitted for review prior to that meeting. The Planner indicated that the Commission could move the CUP request forward if they were comfortable doing so. Maleitzke asked if delaying signage approval would hinder Young opening his business. Young replied that he hopes to open April 1 ", and stated that it would be unlikely that he would have signage up by that time. Young stated that his preference, however, would be that the CUP application move forward. Barraclough asked how long the existing business has been in the building. DeBace replied that they have been there for less than six months. He noted that the business obtained building permits for their build out and indicated that they were never informed they needed a sign permit. The business previous to this one had been in the building since 1990. DeBace noted that he has had other tenants over the years, and was never aware that a master sign plan was needed. Barraclough pointed out that the City's sign ordinance has changed over the years, and the requirement for a master sign plan was likely not in place in 1990. DeBace pointed out that the existing signage is very basic in nature, and again pointed out that the tenant was never informed about the need for a sign permit. DeBace also felt it was extreme to cite this building owner for not obtaining a sign permit. Duray stated that the Commission does not direct what the Code Enforcement Officer does in these situations. The Commission task is to make a recommendation to the Council on the CUP request. Duray noted that the Commission has been asked to table that action until a comprehensive master sign plan is submitted and can be evaluated against the Code. Fischer stated that to present this request to the Council there will have to be a plan showing sign dimensions, materials, locations, etc. Young stated that he thought the detailed information would come as part of the sign permit process. Fischer asked if the Commission could approve the CUP based on the submittals before it, with the stipulation that the detailed master sign plan be submitted to the City Council. The Planner indicated that that can be done if the Commission is comfortable with it. DeBace questioned the need to include future signs on the master sign plan when there those tenants, sign details, etc. are unknown at this time. The City Planner reported that including potential future signs at this time would save the building owner or tenant from going through the process again. The Planner further noted that these signs are not required to be on the plan, however. -4-