06-05-24 PC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – June 5, 2024 9 Community Development Director Jagoe suggested if this was an item from the Planning Commission that the Applicant be strongly encouraged to have landscaping included in their plan prior to this item being reviewed by the City Council. Mr. Grimaliani indicated he supported the proposed landscaping request and could amend his plans prior to this item being reviewed by the City Council. He stated similar action was taken in Savage where annuals and perennials were added to the base of the sign to soften its appearance. Commissioner Wicklund thanked the Applicant for being willing to amend his plans. Commissioner Wicklund moved and Commissioner Blilie seconded a motion to recommend approval of Planning Case 24-012 for Site Plan Review at 4061 Lexington Avenue North, based on the findings of fact and the submitted plans, as amended by the conditions in the June 5, 2024, Report to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Bjorklund spoke against the motion noting this sign was non-conforming and should not be allowed to continue per the City’s sign ordinance. The motion carried 4-1 (Commissioner Bjorklund opposed). UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS A. Sign Code Discussion Senior Planner Fransen stated at their April 17, 2023 meeting, the City Council reviewed a list of staff-identified code amendments for further discussion. Signage was added to this list as a task for the Economic Development Commission. Direction was given to review the current sign code to ensure the standards are consistent with current technology and community needs. At the August 23, 2023 Economic Development Commission meeting, staff presented an introduction to the sign code, with a focus on non-residential, permanent commercial message signage, covering the current format and content of the code with sign standards by sign district and sign type. At subsequent meetings, the EDC reviewed standards for different sign types with an awareness of recent requests for sign standard flexibility through planned unit developments and sign standard adjustments. The group considered wall signage, freestanding signage, and dynamic display signs. The review also included a comparison of the sign codes for the Cities of Shoreview and New Brighton. Senior Planner Fransen provided the Planning Commission with a summary of the EDC’s comments and invited the Planning Commission to review the comment summary provided and ask questions and offer feedback to the EDC based on the provided information. Commissioners may also make additional comments to be considered prior to the summary document going before the City Council. Commissioner Mitchell stated she was delighted to see the City was addressing the sign code. She recommended considering the speed limits set around the City and the science behind sign size and lettering be considered within the sign code. She understood that signs are useful, and well done signs are more useful. She supported the City having appropriately sized signs for safety purposes.