CC PACKET 09251990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

� q PLANNING COMMISSION 3 MINUTES, September 18, 1990 • 1 The public hearing opened at 7:51. 2 3 Newman first responded to the height question: city staff had reviewed the 4 dimensions of the monument including the height. The original proposal was 5 eight feet. That was changed to seven feet and staff was satisfied that it 6 conformed with city ordinances. Mr. Newman confirmed that there were no 7 agreements made regarding signage. The Company believes that is it 8 beneficial to have the monuments on both sides of the street. The place of 9 four signs is for one on each side of the driveway. 10 11 Newman said reasons for placing the variance request is because there are 12 two driveways entering the project and both should be marked. This 13 signage would give balance. He discouraged use of the median for signs. 14 Should the request be denied by the Commission, Newman said the Company 15 can live with one sign but this would present problems with identity and 16 aesthetics. 17 18 Hansen asked about the identification of addresses served by both 19 driveways. 20 21 Newman said it could be required but the residents would probably prefer • 22 just to inform guests of east or west entrance. The Company is trying to 23 have signage that is neat and uncluttered and would like to move on with 24 the project. They are pleased with their relationship with the community. 25 Although they would like to move on, the issue is not critical for them. 26 27 Discussion ensued regarding difficulty in finding addresses. 28 29 The hearing was closed at 8:06. 30 31 Hansen said that he cannot see where the request meets the second or third 32 conditions called for in the Minnesota Statutes in that it does not pose a 33 hardship nor are the conditions of this portion of land unique in that it 34 should require additional signage. He feels that there are a numbers of 35 different types of signs that could mark entrances. In addition, he said that 36 Council has been taking a very tough approach to these requests and this one 37 wouldn't be treated differently. Hansen supports one sign for each entrance --38 and believes four are unnecessary.- 39 nnecessary.39 40 Brownell finds the project aesthetically pleasing but is opposed to granting 41 the variance in its present form because there is no hardship and no 42 necessity for four signs. He also believes the monuments are too high and 43 that this might also be a variance problem. He recommended tabling the 44 motion for additional information or denial. 45