CCP 07-30-1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

- ,- MINUI'ES OF THE ARDEN HILlS REGUIAR PUlNNING aMITSSION MEETING WEDNESDAY, JULY 11, 1990, 7:30 P.M. - CITY HALL . CALL ill ORDER Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Chair ProJ:st called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL The roll being called the following members were present: Chair Dennis ProJ:st, Members Dave Carlson, Peter Martin, Barbara piotrowski and Robert Woodburn. AJ:sent: Members Raymond McGraw, Scott Petersen, Dan Ashbach, Jeanne winiecki and Robert antis. Member Zehm arrived at 7:45 p.m. Also present: Planner John Bergly, Mayor Thomas Sather, Council1nember JoAnn Growe, Clerk Administrator Gary Berger and Deputy Clerk Catherine Iago. APPROVE Woodburn moved, seconded by Piotrowski, to approve the MINUI'ES minutes of the June 6, 1990, Planning Commission meeting as sul:rnitted. Motion carried unanimously. (5-0) CASE #90-08; VAR. Planner Bergly reviewed his report dated 7-11-90, and SEI'BK. & SIGN PERMIT, outlined the proposal to construct a ground-mounted sign, TRINITY LUI'HERAN perpendicular to New Brighton Road, to identify Trinity CHURCH, 3245 NEW Lutheran Church, 3245 New Brighton Road, and the re::{Uest BRIGHIDN ROAD for a 5 ft. setback variance. Bergly explained the applicant is proposing to remove the existing grOund-mounted sign when the proposed sign is constructed. He advised institutions are allowed to have two signs, either wall-mounted or ground-mounted and the existing wall-mounted church sign will remain in addition to the proposed sign. . The Planner stated the applicant is requesting a 5 ft. front yard setback variance noting the curve in New Brighton Road and the 40 mph traffic as hardships that hinder the readability of the sign if placed at. the re::{Uired setback. He stated the proposed sign contains the name of the church in a 12 inch band a=oss the top, a logo (3 ft. x 3 ft.) on the left side, and four rows of 6-inch letters on the remainder of the sign; it is mounted on a low brick foundation. Bergly reviewed the considerations listed in his report: 1. The present ground-mounted sign is small, setback approximately 35 ft. from the road and does not adequately identify the church. The wall-mounted sign is not very obvious, due to the scale of the letter against the brick wall; it appears a new sign is desirable. 2. The applicant claims the curve in New Brighton Road prevents seeing the sign early enough. The maximum distance for reading 6 inch letters appears to be in the 400-500 ft. range and the site distance with a 10 ft. setback is approximately 400 ft; with a 5 ft. setback it would be approximately 500 ft. 3. Iwo signs and a power pole at the ROW line, near the sign location, will interfere with the sign; the interference appears to be greater if the sign is located nearer the right-Df-way, as proposed. 4. Upon site inspection, there does not appear to be any hardships related to the . shape or terrain and the obstructions discussed in item #3 seem to favor a greater rather than lesser setback. 5. Drivers with a destination at the church and not familiar with the location will see the church wilding and will likely sloW dQ\\n to enter the church grounds before they will be able to read the sign.