PL MINUTES 08171982 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-2- Mr. Bowerman. .stated his concern of setting a precedent that would allow two freestanding signs on a property. Mr. Bjorklund shared that • concern but also felt that because of the church 's siting, the distance from the residential neighbors , and the screening of the residential area to the north, there is enough uniqueness to warrant another sign. Mr. Sopcinski voiced his concern about this type of free standing sign, noting that in the past year the Commission had discussed and allowed only monument--type free standing' signs . ' - Further discussion ensued among the members on the types of. free standing signs allowed in the past with agreement reached that monument-type signs are preferred and variances granted .for these in the past. In response to an inquiry by the Commission, .Rev. Valtinson_ said he would be agreeable to modify his plan to -a monument-type structure. - Discussion-.ensued ' among .the members with particularly Mr. Bowerman questioning the reasonableness of . requiring the proposer to build a more expensive, =•monument-type sign when other type signs are in existence in the City and noting the. proposed sign is akin to the signs erected by the City. Mr. Sopcinski noted and with the consensus of the Commission, that the .monument-type sign has been the requirement for acceptance for everyone else in the past couple years . Motion. by Mr. Bjorklund and seconded by Mrs . Makowske . to recommend approval of a two-sided monument sign and that said monument sign . conform to the definition proposed of .a monument sign-which definition • is : a sign mounted on a full scale base with no visibility between the bottom of the sign and the base on which it isattached, because - granting of the .variance will not be detrimental to the public wel- fare or injurious to other property in the neighborhood or City. - a particular hardship to the . applicant would result if the strict letter of the regulations were adhered to as the existing signage is inadequate for proper identification of the site. - the conditions upon which the application for a variance is . based. are unique to the parcel of. land for which the variance is sought and are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same land-use classification, noting: a. the signage will have no appreciable visual impact on neighboring_ residential properties and also noting the end, part of the sign faces the closest residential property. b. the existing signage - is. extremely distant- from the . road and does not provide adequate identification. c. there is no signage on the building. d. no . lighting is proposed. • e. the sign would adequately identify the church which is a semi- public entity. f. the proposed .monument sign would be allowable under the new proposed sign ordinance.