12-07-1988 PTRC Agenda-Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Minutes of the Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting, December 7, 1988 Page 3 CASE 88-35 (Cont'd) The reader board sign would have to be eliminated and the second business signs reduced to 4.5 feet in height for the overall sign to comply with the area requirements. If the reader board provides information regarding the business, it becomes an "advertising" sign, not merely a "business" sign. Bergly stated the applicant is of the opinion a larger/higher sign is warranted due to the distance from the travel lanes of Lexington and the speed of traffic. It appears that the amount of information proposed to be on the sign is really the factor dictating the variance, as the area of the signs or the height from the ground of the lower sign have not changed from previously proposed conforming signs on this property. -Menu Board Sign at drive-up service - The proposed sign is a standard sign used by Burger King at all of their facilities. The sign is located behind the building and not visible from Lexington Avenue. The height increase is related to the position of patrons in their cars and the area increase is related to the amount of information on the menu and letter size. The top 16 inches of the sign display pictures of food available and are not merely informational. -Low Clearance Sign at entrance to drive-up lane - The sign is installed as a deterrent to vehicles over 8'6" high, which may be damaged and may damage the building overhand if allowed to enter the drive-up land. This sign is installed for patron/building safety and is not visible from Lexington Avenue. Bergly explained that requests for sign variances are treated somewhat differently in so far as consideration should be given for surrounding conditions as well as those on site and impact of the sign variance on neighboring • properties. The Planner reviewed the recommendations for action to approve or deny variances for each sign individually, as noted in his report of 12-7-88. The Board of Appeals at their meeting of December 3, 1988, recommended denial of the variances for the Business Sign at the entrance, and approval of the requested variances for the Menu Board and Low Clearance Signs, stating rationale for the recommendations in the minutes of the meeting. Commission questioned if the top portion of the Menu Board, which displayed food, was optional. Bergly stated the applicant advises it is all one sign; in comparison, the Menu Board sign at McDonald's is 4.7 ft. , within Ordinance requirements and displays pictures of food products. Commission questioned if the other business proposed for the site would be allowed a separate free-standing sign. Bergly advised the other business could put signage on their building, however, placement on a sign on this pylon would have to comply with the overall sign regulations for the site. He stated this is a unique situation in the respect it is all one property not divided for the different tenants on the site; one business sign is allowed per street frontage since it is one site. . Commission expressed concern that approval of the variance would impose limitations on the next business to occupy the site.