CC 04-25-1994 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I ~ I I I I I I .. I I I I I I ~ I Arden Hills Council 2 April 25, 1994 tlNFXNJ:SRlm AND NEW BUSINESS CASE #94-01. UNITED PROPERTIES. ARDEN PLAZA. SITE PLAN REVIEW Community Planning Coordinator Fritsinger stated that the applicant originally proposed three (3) new or relocated signs for the Arden Plaza Center. Move existing pylon sign 9' x 9' located on Lexington Avenue to the other side of the driveway. A new area identification sign to identify Arden Plaza and four (4) major tenants at the corner of Lexington and County Road E. A 3' x 3'directional sign to be placed at the entrance to the Plaza along County Road E. The ordinance allows one area identification sign per frontage on public streets with a maximum of two per area. The number of signs proposed would be consistent with this section of the ordinance. Both area identification signs fall within the permitted 100 square foot and 16 foot height allowances. The directional sign would have required a variance both to its height and its total square footage. All three of the signs would be internally illuminated with no external illumination or flashing lights. A change in signage was requested primarily due to a medical clinic locating in the plaza office complex. The clinic will become the major tenant in the office complex. The Planning Commission reviewed the request to amend the signage plan at Arden Plaza at their April 20 meeting. At that meeting, the Commission approved the area identification signs, however, it denied the variance for the directional sign. Chair Winiecki had entrusted Fritsinger to work with the tenant to bring the sign to conformance. The applicant worked with the sign company and revised the directional sign proposed for the County Road E entrance. The sign was reduced both in size and height to comply with the ordinance requirements. The sign was changed to a 2 foot x 3 foot sign. Fritsinger reported that as the directional sign now would comply with the ordinance requirements, there is no longer a need for the variance request.