Laserfiche WebLink
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—MAY 29, 2018 15 <br /> City Planner Bachler reported the pylon sign was not within County right-of-way. <br /> Councilmember Holmes questioned if the Council would require the current pylon sign to be <br /> moved. <br /> Mayor Grant commented this would be required if a gateway sign were pursued. <br /> Councilmember Holmes inquired if the City could require the pylon sign to be moved given the <br /> fact it was already non-conforming. <br /> City Planner Bachler stated the property owner could not relocate the sign given the fact that it <br /> was non-conforming. However, whether the City could require this was a question for the City <br /> Attorney. <br /> City Attorney Jamnik advised this was a site plan review. He reported the applicant was <br /> making substantial changes to the property noting changes were also being made to the parking <br /> lot. For this reason, it would not be unreasonable to impose requirements. <br /> Mr. McKinney commented that movement of the pylon sign would be something he would have <br /> to discuss with his client. He stated the current location was something the client liked about this <br /> property. He anticipated a monument sign may be pursued by his client if the City were to <br /> require the pylon sign to be moved. <br /> Mayor Grant supported this item going back to staff for further work with the applicant to <br /> address the signage concerns and a potential gateway sign. <br /> Councilmember Holden stated she did not have a problem with the existing pylon sign location. <br /> She indicated it would be quite a burden for the applicant to relocate the sign and move the <br /> electricity. She questioned what direction the Council was trying to provide to staff. <br /> Mayor Grant commented he did not want to see the City pursue a gateway sign for this <br /> intersection and have it be crowded by the existing pylon sign. He stated he would like staff to <br /> investigate the potential for a gateway sign at this intersection further prior to the Council taking <br /> action on this Planning Case. <br /> City Planner Bachler summarized the direction from Council noting he would be willing to <br /> work with the applicant and investigate the amount of space that would be needed for a gateway <br /> sign similar to the one located on the triangle property. <br /> Mr. McKinney asked if the Council would be having the same discussion if he would have <br /> walked in to the meeting and called this business Primrose at Arden Hills. He stated he did not <br /> believe the gateway sign issue would have been discussed. <br /> Councilmember Holden commented she believed the conversation would have come up <br /> because the redevelopment of this corner created an opportunity for the City to consider a <br />