06-05-24 PC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 5, 2024 8 and later learned the sign was non-conforming. He commented on how things got put on hold due to COVID. He requested the City consider sign flexibility, due to the fact the sign was not completed within the first year due to extenuating circumstances. Commissioner Bjorklund requested further information on the Primrose School. Mr. Grimaliani explained Primrose School was an early childhood (daycare) program that caters to children from six weeks of age to six years. He noted this was a private for-profit Montessori type school. He indicated there were 550 Primrose Schools nationwide and 21 locations in the Twin Cities. Commissioner Blilie stated she was in favor of this proposal but did not support extra landscaping requirements as a required condition. Commissioner Mitchell agreed. Commissioner Bjorklund indicated he had a number of concerns. He stated the structure has been unused for four and a half years. He explained the total sign copy allowed was 45 feet and the Applicant was requesting 87 feet. He reported the maximum height allowed was 12 feet and this sign would be 27.7 feet high. He commented this sign was very tall and the overhang was unclear. It was his understanding this sign was very close to the property line. He reported non- conforming signs were not to be enlarged or expanded. He stated this was clearly a non- conforming sign. In addition, non-conforming signs were to be discontinued after a year of non- use. He did not support the City violating these portions of the sign ordinance. He reported he did not like this sign because it was too big and too close to the property line. He supported this property moving forward with a ground mounted monument sign in conformance with the sign code. Commissioner Wicklund stated he appreciated how the applicant was working to maximize an existing asset. He understood Sign Art was a great company to work with. He shared an image of the sign that was across the street to the north, noting he would like the Commission to consider an additional condition to read: Applicant shall work with City staff and provide appropriate and feasible landscaping around the existing sign. He stated he was in favor of the request before the Commission with the additional condition. Commissioner Blilie indicated she supported the Applicant being allowed to use the existing sign versus requiring them to tear it down. She indicated she accepted the additional condition regarding the landscaping. Commissioner Mitchell reported she also supported the existing sign being used, versus wasting money on tearing it down. She believed the proposed sign was a reasonable alternative given the situation and makes the best use of the property. In addition, she supported the sign having landscaping around it. Vice Chair Collins explained he was in favor of keeping the sign as well. He questioned how the City was to determine what was “appropriate landscaping”. Commissioner Wicklund stated he would be amenable to other language for his condition that would better reflect or provide clarity to staff. He was of the opinion staff could determine what type of landscaping would be appropriate at the base of the sign.