11-26-07 Item 7A, PC 07-018 3527 Lexington Ave Redevelopment

Home Browse Search

and each business would be permitted a full allocation of wall signage (i.e. 60 or 80 square feet per business). In developments with two road frontages, which is the case in this application, a second half size freestanding sign (40 or 50 square feet) would be permitted, However, the PUD process permits flexibility in applying the Sign Code to allow for different types of developments. Proposed Wall Sign Plan (square feet) Exterior Wall Walgreen's Building 2 Building 3 East 63.85 46.9 80 North 63.85 69.6 80 West 27.62 69.6 0 South 0 0 0 Total 155.32 186.1 160 The signage on the retail strip mall would remain unchanged. The applicant is proposing to replace the three existing freestanding signs with the following signs: Existing & Proposed Freestanding Signs Existing sf Proposed sf Lexington Avenue Entrance 80 100 Lexington Avenue/County Road E Corner 120 45 County Road E Entrance <4 100 The area of a freestanding or wall sign only includes the sign face, which is the text, graphic or other sign message. The sign area does not include the sign strncture. The total freestanding sign area on the property would increase from approximately 200 square feet to 245 square feet with this freestanding sign proposal. In the report to the Planning Commission, Staff did recommend that the proposed monument sign at the Lexington Avenue and County Road E intersection for the Walgreen's store be removed from the redevelopment proposal. While the existing freestanding sign at the comer advertises for a number of the businesses on the property, the proposed replacement sign for the corner would only advertise the Walgreen's store. Since the proposed Walgreen's store includes wall signage that would be visible from County Road E, Lexington Avenue, and the intersection the need for a separate freestanding Walgreen's sign is diminished. The existing mature trees near the County Road E and Lexington Avenue corner provide a significant amount of screening for the pod office building from the street, which makes the existing freestanding sign at the intersection necessary to adequately advertise businesses on the property. However, if the trees near the corner are removed as proposed, the visibility for a building near that intersection is increased and the need for keeping the freestanding sign at City of Arden Hills City Council Work Session for November 13, 2007 IlMetro-inet.uslardenhills\PlanninglPlanning Cases\2007\07-018 Arden Plaza pun (In Review)\111307 - CC Report Work Session - Arden Plaza - Master PUD.doc Page 5 of 10