11-24-14-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION – OCTOBER 20, 2014 5 property. The existing Sign Code divides the City into nine separate Sign Districts based on land use classification and type of frontages. Generally, properties in commercial districts with frontage on major arterials are permitted more signage than similar commercial properties on collector streets or properties in industrial and residential areas. In comparison, the TRC bases permitted signage on the size of the building and length of property frontage, as well as on land use classification. Permitted wall signage is determined by calculating the linear feet of the building’s frontage multiplied by a certain ratio. Similarly, the allowed sign copy area on freestanding signs is determined by applying a ratio to the linear feet of property frontage along a street. City Planner Streff stated that as proposed, the TRC sign standards would permit certain sign types currently prohibited under the Arden Hills Sign Code. The TRC allows for the use of building projecting signs, roof signs, and tenant blade signs. The existing Sign Code prohibits both projecting signs and roof signs. Once adopted, for development in TCAAP, the TRC will supersede any regulations found in the Arden Hills Code, including restrictions on certain sign types. Staff reviewed the comments received from the Council to date regarding sign standards. Councilmember Holden expressed concern with the fact that I-35W and Highway 10 were being viewed the same as Highway 96 with regard to sign standards. She indicated that the speed limit was different between these roadways, along with the volume of traffic. She recommended that the Highway 96 signs be reduced to 70% of what would be allowed along I-35W and Highway 10. City Planner Streff reported that staff had flagged this portion of Code and would be reviewing the highway monument signs for Highway 96 in further detail. He reviewed the sign sizes that would be allowed along the Spine Road and Highway 96. Councilmember Holmes did not want to see sign standards vary too greatly from the current City sign standard. Mayor Grant stated that he was not in favor of allowing tenant canopy signs. Councilmember McClung commented that he would not support building projecting signs in the neighborhood transition, retail mixed use, neighborhood or the overlay district. Councilmember Holden recommended that the sign code address proper and appropriate sign building materials. City Planner Streff commented that staff would review this matter further. Councilmember Holden indicated that the Council may have to review the current City sign standard after decisions were made on the TCAAP Sign Code in order to keep requirements consistent. Councilmember Holmes recommended that roof signs not be allowed. She suggested that monument signs not be too large.