My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-09-05
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
05-09-05
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2012 10:46:45 AM
Creation date
11/14/2006 4:24:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
139
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />~ <br />,,^~HILLS <br /> <br />MEMORANDUM <br /> <br />DATE: <br /> <br />Agenda Item 6.B <br /> <br />May 9,2005 <br /> <br />TO: Mayor and City Council <br /> <br />FROM: Peter Hellegers, City Planner ~ <br /> <br />SUBJECT: PC #05-10, Ramsey County <br />1425 Paul Kirkwold Drive (Ramsey County Public Works and Sheriff Station) <br />Sign Variance <br /> <br />Requested Action <br /> <br />Consider the requested Sign Standard Adjustment of 130 square feet from the Signage Ordinance <br />eriteria for a freestanding monument sign (Seetion 333, Table 1): <br />. Maximum Area for Freestanding Signs: 130-square foot variance (from 45sq. ft. to 175 sq. ft.) <br /> <br />Planninl! Commission Discussion and Recommendation <br /> <br />Recommendation <br />At their May 4, 2005 meeting the Planning Commission reviewed Planning Case #05-10 and <br />unanimously recommended denial (5-1) of the Sign Standard Adjustment for the following <br />reasons: <br />1. The proposed sign is inconsistent with both the Civic Center Zoning District and Sign District <br />6, which anticipated more destination oriented facilities that would not require as much <br />signage as the commercial zoning and signage districts. The proposed sign would require a <br />variance of 130 square feet and would be nearly four (4) times the maximum size for the <br />freestanding signage in that sign district. Furthermore the proposed sign is nearly twice as <br />large as the maximum size for freestanding signage anywhere in the City. A smaller variance <br />from the Sign Ordinance Standards would give the applieant the greater visibility they are <br />seeking and would also be more consistent with the City's Sign Ordinance Standards. <br /> <br />Discussion <br />The Planning Commission discussion at the May 4, 2005 meeting centered on the design and <br />overall size of the proposed Ramsey County monument sign. A majority of the Planning <br />Commission seemed to agree that a sign varianee may be needed; however the magnitude of the <br />variance (130 square feet I almost 4 times the amount allowed) was just too much. Following are <br />some paraphrased questions asked at the meeting: <br /> <br />. \\Earth\Planning\Planning Cases\200S\05-10 RCPWF Sign Variance (PENDJNG)\OS-09-05 CC Report OS-IO.doc <br /> <br />Page 1 of2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.