My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7E, Planning Case 09-007 Site Plan Review for 3585 Lexington Avenue North
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2009
>
05-11-09-R
>
7E, Planning Case 09-007 Site Plan Review for 3585 Lexington Avenue North
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2009 11:34:43 AM
Creation date
5/12/2009 11:31:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Document
Planning Case 2009-07 - Site Plan Review
General - Type
3585 Lexington Avenue North
Date
5/11/2009
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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 />Commissioner Thompson expressed concern regarding the quality of signs to be used and <br />stated the City's ordinance is such that if a sign is broken or otherwise in disrepair, the <br />City can enforce the ordinance and require the owner of the sign to remedy the situation. <br />She stated she is concerned about the sign looking tacky, e.g., letters missing, and felt <br />there was not enough language in the conditions to address this and to ensure that the sign <br />looks professional. <br /> <br />City Planner Beekman stated in terms of upkeep, that is regulated by the sign code and if <br />a sign is broken, cracked, or falling over, one of the City's public works staffwould pick <br />it up or bring it into the business. She stated in terms of letters falling off, the Code <br />requires that the signs be kept in a well maintained fashion. <br /> <br />Commissioner Thompson asked if a condition should be added that the City can rescind <br />the sign standard adjustment if there are issues with the business owner not taking the <br />sign down at night. <br /> <br />City Planner Beekman stated if the conditions are not followed, then the sign can be <br />revoked, similar to a CUP violation. She stated this is standard language and if there are <br />concerns about maintenance, the Planning Commission can add a condition that <br />specifically deals with that concern. She added in terms of the structure of the sign, she <br />felt comfortable with Staff having enough power to enforce the conditions with the <br />existing Sign Code regulations. <br /> <br />Commissioner Holewa stated he was under the impression that there is a health club <br />business in this development that operates 24 hours per day. He expressed concern about <br />"normal business hours" because this would mean the health club could have a sign in <br />place 24 hours per day, representing their normal business hours. He stated he would be <br />more inclined to include language that specifies permitted hours for placement of a sign <br />or that a sign needs to be taken down by 10:00 p.m. He also asked about the small signs <br />that have been placed along Lexington Avenue that advertise specials. <br /> <br />City Planner Beekman replied she has seen those signs and they are illegal. <br /> <br />Commissioner Modesette moved, seconded by Commissioner Zimmerman, to <br />recommend approval of Planning Case 09-007, for a Site Plan Review at 3585 Lexington <br />Avenue based on the findings of fact, the submitted plans, and the six conditions in the <br />May 6, 2009, Planning Case report. <br /> <br />Further discussion: <br /> <br />Chair Larson stated concerns were expressed regarding hours of display of the sign and <br />maintenance of the sign; Staffhas indicated they feel certain this can be controlled <br />through the ordinance. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.