Laserfiche WebLink
• Mounds View Planning Commission November 20, 1996 <br /> Special Meeting Page 5 <br /> indicated he felt they were distracting, unattractive, and that they do not fit into <br /> any urban landscape. <br /> Mr. Streeter expressed that they do not want to make the sign a monument by <br /> itself and attract that much attention. He added that they would like to make the <br /> sign proportionate, balanced, and architecturally pleasing to the shopping <br /> center. <br /> Mr. Streeter again reviewed the items that concerned him in the resolution. <br /> Following this discussion, Director Sheldon explained to the applicant what the <br /> City wanted by requiring the planting of trees behind the monument signs. Mr. <br /> Paster replied that putting up clusters of trees would not suit the primary <br /> purpose of the shopping center which is to be noticed. He added that he did not <br /> have a problem with small accent trees, but was opposed to types of trees such <br /> as evergreens which would stand above the sign. <br /> The applicant and the Planning Commission further discussed the conditions <br /> • contained in Resolution No. 484-96. It was the consensus of the Planning <br /> Commission to take out the requirement contained in the resolution regarding <br /> brick and replace it with brick, break-off block or stone and to also reduce the <br /> size allowed for the signs to a maximuml0 feet in height by 16 feet in width. <br /> They also added to the resolution that the material used for the sign wall shall <br /> be compatible with the center and landscaping shall be planted behind the sign <br /> to include three trees of a species that, at maturity, would be approximately the <br /> same height as the sign. <br /> Commissioner Brooks left the meeting at 9:48 p.m. <br /> • <br /> variance in the Mounds View Sign Code to allow three monument signs at the Mounds <br /> View Square Shopping Center, 2535-2585 Highway 10, Planning Case No. 462-96, <br /> with the revisions discussed by the Planning Commission. <br /> Motion Carried on a vote of 5 ayes and 1 nay. (Commissioner Obert expressed that he <br /> felt the applicant is requesting too much signage.) <br /> • <br />