CCP 06-26-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I-- I.L. <t 0:: C ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 7, 2006 8 had more than one aecess. She stated in some areas four signs were not sufficient to direct traffic to the home for sale. She stated there was not a problem with listing a sign . owner's name and address on real estate signs and signs were writtel1 with permanent market on the inside of the sign with the owner's name and address. She indicated the signs were expensive and rcal estate agents did not want to lose their signs. She stated that some cities charge an impound fee to retrieve a SigIl, which is a strong incentive to pick up our signs. She stated to include the name and address of the home they were selling would be burdensome and probably would not look good because that information would need to be temporarily affixed to the sign. She stated it would be very burdensome to register real estate signs with City Hall. In Table I, she expressed concern that temporary signs were allowed in only District I and District 3. She believed allowing temporary signs in all of the Districts would be very helpful. Commissioner McClung noted the problem they had with this was the City did not want to see a lot of temporary commerciallbusiness signs. Ms. Hames stated thc riders added to the real estate signs did add to the square footage, but the riders did communicate valuable information. She noted the brochure boxes were a very markcting tool and she understood the brochure boxes were not part of the signage. She indicated without the riders the signs were 2 feet by 3 feet and there might be up to two or three different riders on each sign. She encouragcd them to allow the riders. She noted they were sceing longer market times and signage and timing was critical. She stated real estate agents were good about pieking up their open house signs because they usually needed those signs for another open house that day. She stated to allow open houses only on weekends, did not allow networking of agents, which were hcld on Tuesday when agents toured perspective properties. She asked for a provision for these types of events. She indicated it would also be burdensome to only place signs within a half mile of the home being sold as there were instances where they needed to direct people from a major route to the home, which was over a half mile away. She asked them to reconsider this requiremcnt. . Commissioner Zimmerman stated they also needed to address the signs that directed pcople to homes for sale off of a major thoroughfare. Ms. Hames stated that most cities do not allow directional arrows and she understood this concern. She stated she did not believe the City would get a lot of complaints from realtors rcgarding not permitting these types of signs. She noted it was the temporary signs that were the "life blood" of their business and not the arrow signs. She indicated all of the tcmporary signs were for marketing to sell a home morc quickly. She stated the City needed to be conscious that thc housing stock in Arden Hills did not continue to decrease in valuc. She stated she has not seen any community address the riders on real estate signs. Mr. Lehnhoff stated staff would change somc of the requested changes and re-evaluate the off-premise sign options based on tonight's dicussion and have the City Attorney review it. He stated a motion is not required at this time and he would inform the Planning Commission of the next step. The sign regulations are likely to go to the June 26 City Coul1cil mccting for review. .