My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC MINUTES 01102012
StAnthony
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
2012
>
CC MINUTES 01102012
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 11:53:26 AM
Creation date
8/25/2016 11:53:26 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes <br />January 10, 2012 <br />Page 3 <br />1 Commission felt that the additional sign would lend clarity to the architecture, would clearly <br />2 mark the location of the entrance, and the combined square footage of the existing sign and the <br />3 proposed additional sign is under the maximum allowed by the City Code of 150 square feet. <br />4 <br />5 Mayor Faust felt that the building makes it look like two distinct businesses. He asked whether <br />6 the existing and proposed signage would exceed the maximum signage allowed if this were in <br />7 fact two businesses. <br />9 Planning Commissioner Crone replied that it would not exceed the maximum of 150 square feet. <br />10 <br />11 Councilmember Jenson requested further information regarding the Planning Commission's <br />12 analysis and reasons for recommending approval of the variance when the staff report indicates <br />13 that the architect's design does not justify a hardship. <br />14 <br />15 Planning Commissioner Crone explained the Planning Commission concluded that the additional <br />16 sign represented a reasonable use and recognized the clinic's interest to clearly have its patients <br />17 understand the location of the entrance to the clinic. <br />18 <br />19 Councilmember Jenson felt that the word "entrance" should be rather intuitive for people <br />20 entering the clinic. <br />21 <br />22 Planning Commissioner Crone agreed but the clinic is interested in something more <br />23 architecturally complementary to its existing sign. <br />24 <br />25 Councilmember Jenson asked if the Planning Commission felt that was sufficient justification for <br />26 determining a hardship. <br />27 <br />28 Planning Commissioner Crone reiterated that the existing signage and proposed sign do not <br />29 exceed the maximum allowed and the Planning Commission felt this was an appropriate use. <br />30 <br />31 Mr. Richard Lang, Visual Communications, appeared before the City Council and presented a <br />32 rendering of the proposed sign. He stated that patients coming to the clinic are under stress, ill, <br />33 elderly, etc., and the front of the building does not clearly tell you where the entrance is located. <br />34 He noted that the architecture has a large commanding brick area which naturally brings you to <br />35 the center, away from the entrance location. He explained that the clinic's large existing sign <br />36 needs to be readable from Highway 88 to create attention; however, the clinic is aware that this <br />37 sign could mislead people at to the entrance. He stated the clinic wants to have a clear <br />38 identification of its entrance and the non - illuminated entrance letters do not stand out well. He <br />39 indicated the proposed sign is gray toned, is not overly illuminated, is functional, and has down <br />40 lighting to light up the entrance letters and canopy below to clearly mark the entrance area. <br />41 <br />42 Councilmember Jenson asked if consideration was given to illuminating the current entrance <br />43 sign. He also asked if any of the clinic's customers have been confused about the entrance <br />44 location. <br />45 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.