Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission November 20, 1996 <br /> Special Meeting Page 4 <br /> 484-96 and suggested that the applicant comment on the conditions. <br /> Mr. Streeter commented, regarding Item 2 of the resolution, that although they <br /> have submitted a brick design for the sign, he presumes that the design would <br /> be a decorative block with brick trim and indicated that they have an architect <br /> that recommends a certain design for the signs. Mr. Streeter also had questions <br /> regarding the required berm and landscaping. He said that the requirement to <br /> install trees around the proposed signage is unacceptable to them because it <br /> may deter attention from the signage. He continued by requesting that they <br /> have the option to use brick and decorative break-off block in accordance with <br /> the design specified by their architect. He also stated that they have a uniform <br /> color for the sign text; however, if a major tenant requests a different color due to <br /> their national advertising theme, they would like to accommodate their request. <br /> Commissioner Miller asked the applicant how craft sales and similar events <br /> that are held at the center would be advertised. Mr. Streeter replied that there <br /> would be no reader boards on the signs, and therefore, they would not be <br /> • advertised this way. <br /> Commissioner Brooks inquired as to the landscaping they are proposing. Mr. <br /> Streeter indicated that the landscaping would be designed by their in-house <br /> architect and approved by our City Forester. <br /> Mr. Paster was concerned with item 4 in the resolution which states that 1/2 of <br /> the sign wall shall be used for wording and indicated that some of the major <br /> tenants may use more lettering, even if it means shrinking the lettering for the <br /> name of the center itself. Director Sheldon added that if the Planning <br /> Commission wants a certain portion of the sign area to be used for the center's <br /> name then they would need to specify that in the resolution. The Planning <br /> Commission discussed the wording that would be appropriate for the resolution. <br /> Director Sheldon explained to the Planning Commission that the fourth sign was <br /> not included in the variance request because she felt it was not needed to <br /> overcome the effect of the bridge and wanted to make it clear that the Planning <br /> Commission would not be taking action on the fourth sign even though it was <br /> shown on the diagram submitted by the applicant. <br /> Mr. Streeter again referred to the item in the resolution regarding uniform color <br /> and requested that this item be removed from the resolution in order to <br /> • accommodate future requests from tenants. Commissioner Obert expressed <br /> his opposition with the erection of these type of signs listing tenant names and <br />