My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2008_0519_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2008
>
2008_0519_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/15/2012 1:34:52 PM
Creation date
12/29/2011 2:43:08 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
120
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
Draft Minutes Attachment E <br />PLANNING FILE 08 -013 <br />Request by Centennial Gardens Apartment for an Interim Use Permit to allow a temporary <br />apartment leasing sign to be erected on the Hamline Shopping Center property, 2797 — 2833 <br />Hamline Avenue <br />Chair Bakeman opened the Public Hearing for Planning File 08-013. <br />Associate Planner Bryan Lloyd reviewed staffs analysis of the request for an Interim Use Permit (IUP) to <br />allow Centennial Gardens Apartment complex to install a sign at the adjacent Hamline Shopping Center <br />property through October of 2008, in accordance with City Code, Section 1012.09 (Interim Uses). <br />Mr. Lloyd advised that the IUP request is prompted by the Centennial Gardens apartment complex being <br />subject to significant vacancies related to ongoing renovations, with the applicant believing that installing <br />a sign in the proposed location during the next several months would assist apartment seekers in <br />discovering Centennial Gardens during the most active apartment - searching months. <br />Staff recommended APPROVAL of the request by Centennial Gardens and the owners of the property at <br />2797 — 2833 Hamline Avenue, to allow a temporary sign based on the comments and findings outlined in <br />Sections 5 and 6, and subject to the conditions detailed in Section 7 of the project report dated May 7, <br />2008. <br />Discussion included the extent of renovations at the apartment complex; criteria for sign removal <br />enforcement by December 31, 2008 and suggested earlier removal of the sign if vacancies are filled <br />before year -end; arrangements between the shopping center and apartment owners; maximum height <br />and design of sign; original site plan submitted by the applicant versus the plan created by staff for <br />presentation; traffic visibility triangle considerations; location restrictions for sign placement; clear <br />definition of the public rights -of -way; sign permit application process; and whether the sign would be <br />illuminated. <br />Further discussion related to sign materials (wooden); applicable code enforcement issues if the sign is to <br />be illuminated; seasonal timing for removal of the sign footings; economic advantages in interests in filling <br />vacancies in this complex; definitions of billboards versus signs; prohibitions of the location of the sign, <br />not the sign itself; and past similar IUP's for signage. <br />Applicant, Mike Swenson <br />Mr. Swenson advised of his firm's purchase of the property in July of 2007, and ongoing cosmetic <br />rehabilitation of the complex, with existing tenants given the choice to stay or leave during renovations. <br />Mr. Swenson noted that the current lack of "curb appeal" during the renovation process, and the tenants <br />who chose to leave during renovations, had prompted the requested IUP to make the complex and <br />vacancy status more noticeable to Hamline Avenue traffic. Mr. Swenson anticipated that by fall, most of <br />the vacancies would be filled. <br />Discussion among commissioners and Mr. Swenson included the type of improvements (i.e., new <br />windows; new front facades on building exteriors; updated swimming pool area; new decks; new <br />landscaping) in an amount exceeding $2 million; advantages of summer advertising; and the applicant's <br />intent for the sign installation and removal. <br />Mr. Swenson advised that the sign would be on a pedestal for easy removal; and that there was no intent <br />to light the sign. Mr. Swenson invited commissioners to stop by to visit and view a model apartment. <br />Chair Bakeman closed the Public Hearing, with no one appearing to speak. <br />Commissioner Doherty advised that he would support the IUP due to the significance of the scale of <br />renovations being undertaken at the complex. Commissioner Doherty opined that, if not for the <br />redevelopment of the property, and the City's interest in that rehabilitation of multi - family housing in the <br />community, he would not be supportive of permitting the sign simply to enhance marketing of the rentals. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.