09-04-13 PC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION –September 4, 20138 Community Development Intern Bachlernoted the signs would not be lit internally, but would provide advertisement for the building tenants and would be uniform size. Commissioner Holewa asked the height of theproposed monument sign and the staff recommendation regarding the height of the sign. Community Development Intern Bachlerstated the staff recommendation was for the monument sign nottoexceed 20 feet in height.Given the site conditions and setback from Lexington Avenue, staff was willing to allow additional height on the monument sign. Commissioner Thompson inquired if a monument sign would be allowed on Red Fox Road. Community Development Intern Bachlerclarified that under the sign code, the applicant would be allowed to have two monument signs, however, the applicant would be building only one along Lexington Avenue. He advised thatthe Planning Commission could add a condition for approval stating only one monument sign, along Lexington Avenue, would be allowed and that a second monument sign along Red Fox Road not be permitted. Commissioner Stodola asked if the west side of the Phase I buildingwould have blade signs. Community Development Intern Bachlercommented blade signs would only be located on the west side of the building. Commissioner Zimmermanquestioned if the “Lexington Station” identification could be removed from the monument sign and be placed on the building instead. Community Development Intern Bachlerstated this conversation was not held with the applicant. Chair Larson stated there would be five buildingsconstructed as part of the Lexington Station redevelopmentand that this may not be the correctcourse of action for the City to take. Nicolas Roberts, 1851 Berkley Road, White Bear Lake, discussed the proposed signage further with the Commission. Commissioner Stodola inquired if additional monument signs would be added with the future phases. Mr. Roberts anticipated this would be the case after the future buildings were completed. Community Development Intern Bachlerexplained that this development had a single Development Agreement, but covered three separate parcels. He stated each of the parcels would be permitted to have wall and free standing signage as allowed within City Code. He indicated that a Final PUD with a sign plan would have to be submitted by the applicant when Phase II and Phase IIIwereready for development. Mr. Roberts commented he was not prepared to request signage for the other parcels this evening and would have to come back to the City at a future date.