04-12-10-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—April 12, 2010 5 7.A. Proposal to Purchase Two Gateway Signs from SignArt USA for a Cost Not to Exceed $10,500 to be Located at the Southwest Corner of County Road E and Lexington Avenue Intersection and the Southeast Corner of the Highway 96 and Round Lake Road Intersection (continued) - Community Development Director Lehnhoff stated this was correct. MOTION: Councilmember Holden moved and Mayor Harpstead seconded a motion to Approve the Proposal to Purchase Two Gateway Signs from SigunArt USA for a Cost Not to Exceed $10,500 to be Located at the Southwest Corner of County Road E and Lexington Avenue Intersection and the Southeast Corner of the Highway 96 and Round Lake Road Intersection. Acting City Administrator Iverson read into the record the following comment from Councilmember Holmes: "I believe the time is right for Gateway signs and I appreciate the Economic Development Committee's work on this issue. I am in favor of two signs being installed this year. And the location at Highway 96 and Round Lake Road appears to be an appropriate place. I am not, however, in favor of installation of a sign at Lexington and County Road E at this time. The reason I oppose this location, is that placing this sign at this point is contrary to a prior Council decision. The Council had already decided that a Gateway sign would be part of the redevelopment of Arden Plaza, and if part of the redevelopment project, payment for the sign would not be the City's responsibility. Although that project has been delayed, I believe that project will happen and the Council already has a plan for a Gateway sign at that location. I am not in favor of having a sign installed there, even if there is the contingency that it might be moved in the future. From my perspective, the best place for the second sign is at County D and Cleveland, a location, which had been previously identified as a potential location for a Gateway sign. From talking with residents and nonresidents, this seems to be an area, in particular, where people do not know where Roseville ends and Arden Hills begins. However, I am flexible with regard to where both signs are to be located, I just believe the Lexington and E location is not the right location at this time." - Councilmember McClung stated he is not a supporter of gateway signs. Although he appreciates the work the EDC did he believes this money could be better used for business retention and outreach. The majority of residents he has talked to do not support gateway signs. Councilmember Grant thanked the EDC for their work. He stated although he is in support of gateway signs he is not in support of this particular proposal. The design of the sign could be better and he expressed concerns about the reusability of the signs. These signs are something people will judge the community by and the City needs to be careful about the quality of these signs. He also stated he did not like the location of the sign at Lexington Avenue and County Road E because it looks like it is a temporary sign. He stated he would be willing to approve more money for a quality sign. He suggested scaling the signs down and incorporating the cultured stone look. These are not the right signs for Arden Hills. Councilmember Holden explained the EDC worked hard on getting this proposal together for the Council. She assured the Council the materials on the sign do not look cheap. Businesses in the community have been asking for identification signs for several years. The Council has not talked about having stone on every gateway sign and this would be cost prohibitive.