11-06-1996 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• Mounds View Planning Commission November 6, 1996 Regular Meeting Page 14 replied that usually the tenant wants an identification sign that separates them from everyone else and that monument signage may not always be accepted as the desired signage for their site. He also indicated that promoting the name of the tenants seems to now be the trend. He thinks that if we have the monument sign near the area where the pond and the proposed bridge will be located, as Staff as indicated, it would be innovative and a somewhat different approach. He added that it may take some convincing the restaurant that it would be adequate, but he would make a real hard sell for going to the monument sign with the tenant's name on it and eliminating the pylon sign for the tenant. He generally thinks the concept would work but may be a very hard sell. Chair Peterson inquired if the Planning Commission had everything they needed to give this case further consideration. Director Sheldon at this time indicated that she needs from the applicant a diagram that shows the locations where they want the signage and also a drawing of the signage itself as to what the package is that goes with the variance. She suggested then that if the Planning Commission is in agreement that shopping centers need to be looked at again in terms of how signage is handled, especially centers this large, a provision can be worked on that would allow for sign packages. She indicated that she could come back with the proposal for the center identification signs which the applicant feels are needed because of the bridge and can then get working on the overall signage. Commissioner Stevenson suggested that the Commission explore what the signage is of • other similar centers along Highway 10, such