06-27-2000 PC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . Planning Commission Minutes June 27, 2000 Page 12 13. THAT ANY PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SIGNS BE SHOWN ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND THAT A SIGN PERMIT BE OBTAINED FROM THE CITY PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGNS. 14. THAT THE ROADS BE LIMITED TO PARKING ON ONE SIDE OF THE STREET WITH SIGNS INDICATING NO PARKING. 15. THAT ANY TREES ON OR OFF SITE, NEAR THE LIMIT OF GRADING, THAT ARE TO BE PROTECTED, BE FENCED WITH A SNOW FENCE PRIOR TO TREE REMOVAL OR CONSTRUCTION OF THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AT THE DRIPLlNE TO PREVENT DAMAGE TO TREES BY INADVERTENT GRADING, EROSION, SOIL COMPACTION AND STORAGE OF DEBRIS OR EQUIPMENT IN THE TREES. 16. THAT THE PLAT INCLUDE THE DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS AS DETERMINED BY THE CITY ENGINEER. COMMISSIONER CHAMBERS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 7-0. 5.8. Reauest bv Snyder Dru9 Stores, Inc. for Amendment to Conditional Use Permit, Public Hearing - Case No. CU 00-22 Staff report by Scott Harlicker. Snyder Drug Stores has requested an amendment to their conditional use permit to allow a third wall sign and three 1 Hour Photo signs. The current signage is approximately 5 percent of the total square footage of the front elevation. The additional signage would increase this amount to approximately 9 percent. Staff recommends approval of the request and asked that the Commission consider amending the sign ordinance to allow signage based on the same method used for Wal-Mart and Home Depot. Commissioner Baker asked if the signs would be illuminated. Mr. Harlicker stated they would be. Commissioner Pederson asked how sign age is currently determined. Mr. Harlicker explained that signage is based on the size of the letters. Commissioner Kuester asked if the Snyder building had other tenants. Mr. Harlicker stated that there will be other tenants and they will be allowed to have their own signs. Commissioner Kuester expressed her support for the ordinance amendment proposed by staff. The Commissioners discussed their concern that the front of the building was changed from what was originally approved. Steve Wensman explained that revision was a result of a change in ownership of the Snyder property. Ms. McPherson noted that the Commission was given an opportunity to review the plans when the front elevation was changed, and it was the consensus of the Commissioners to not review it. Chair Mesich stated he did not realize the entire front of the building was being changed. Chair Mesich opened the public hearing.