PL MINUTES 10212003 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 2 October 21, 2003 •: Page 6 5 comprehensive sign plan. She explained this is unfinished business from the September 160, 6 Public Hearing in the applicant's efforts to update their comprehensive sign plan. She noted 7 the Shopping Center has been attending the Planning Commission and City Council 8 meetings since August to address the need and implementation of logo signs. She noted the 9 St. Anthony Shopping Center recently signed leases with two tenants that have regional and 10 national scope, Bumper to Bumper and Subway. She explained that the current 11 comprehensive sign plan does not provide sufficient flexibility of sign design to 12 accommodate regional and national tenants that have logo signage for all locations. She 13 reviewed stating that at the last Planning Commission meeting it was recommended to the 14 City Council that yellow lettering be added into the comprehensive sign plan for approval to 15 allow Subway to put up their sign adding that it was decided that the remaining issues 16 surrounding the logos would be addressed at a future meeting once the applicant presented 17 the City with proposed language. She reviewed the proposed language for the logo signage 18 with the Commission. She noted several other issues that should be addressed stating that 19 the Subway logo sign also includes white lettering and suggested that this color should be 20 included into the sign criteria. She noted the temporary banner above the Bumper to 21 Bumper appears to take up more than it's share of the wall and asked that this be reviewed. 22 She noted that the El Ray Bakery has had a temporary sign for quite some time and that they 23 have not pulled a sign permit yet. She asked what their plans are for permanent signage. 24 She explained that the question for the Planning Commission is whether the proposed 25 language for logo signage addresses the issues raised over the last couple of months. She suggested that the Planning Commission ensure that the parameters are in place to ensure consistency. 28 29 Commissioner Tillman asked if specified height and percentage of space used in front was 30 clarified in the proposal. 31 32 Commissioner Stromgren noted the City Council objections had to do with the size. Ms. 33 Hall suggested clarifying the size of the signage with Bumper to Bumper. 34 35 Jim Crockeril Co-Owner-St. Anthony Shopping Center, LLC stated that he touched base with 36 eleven of the fifteen tenants to determine whether there were any issues with the proposed 37 language. He stated that no one had any issues. He reviewed, noting that 50% or less would be 38 backlit signs adding that they are quite attractive. 39 40 Chair Melsha asked if they expected any other large tenants besides Bumper to Bumper or 41 Subway that could have logo issues. Mr. Crockeril clarified that typically the tenants are local 42 merchants who do not have logos to display adding that he does not expect any other large 43 tenants. 44 45 Vice Chair Stille asked Mr. Crockeril if he brought any examples for the Commission to review. 46 Mr. Crockeril stated that the examples had been provided in a previous package and that he did `47 not have anything that has changed. 0 Mr. Crockeril reviewed the comments from City Council regarding the backlighting in addition 50 to Council concerns that the sign is inconsistent with the rest of the tenant. He explained that