08-24-2004 PC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . Planning Commission Minutes August 24, 2004 Page 7 IN MODIFIED lANGUAGE DISTRIBUTED BY STAFF AT THIS EVENING'S MEETING. Commissioner Offerman asked if this amendment was initiated in response to the request for an additional development sign for Lafayette Woods. Mr. Leeseberg stated yes. Commissioner Offerman expressed his concern that there are entrance monument signs in the City that are not on arterial streets, which is in conflict with the ordinance. He stated he does not oppose more than one development sign, but that he would like to see language included that the sign must be architecturally designed and of materials that are aesthetically pleasing. He stated that he would not want to see more than on sign, if the sign is a 4'x8' plywood sign attached to two posts. Ms. McPherson stated that 4'x8' plywood signs are typically temporaty for construction or leasing purposes. She asked what the Commission's minimum expectations were, and at what point do they wish to require a certain level of signage. She stated that it would be difficult to regulate aesthetics and to incorporate that into an ordinance. Mr. Offerman stated he would like to see a distinction made between entrance monument signs and cheap plywood construction or leasing signs. Commissioner Anderson stated that he did not feel it was appropriate to legislate materials for all signage districts throughout the City. Commissioner Stevens concurred with Commissioner Offerman's comments. He stated that minimum standards should be established for uniformity of monument signs. Commissioner Lemke asked if there are any standards in place now. Ms. McPherson stated that staff reviews requests to ensure that they meet the ordinance requirements for size (square footage) and setbacks, unless they are part of a Planned Unit Development with specific standards for size, materials, and location. He asked if standards were established for these signs, would the standards apply to all signs throughout the city. Ms. McPherson stated yes. Commissioner Offerman asked why not simply make a distinction between residential entrance monument signs and other types of signs. Ms. McPherson stated that they are all "signs" . Commissioner Curtis stated that the city she is employed by recendy adopted an ordinance requiring any ground sign to be a monument sign, and to require certain standards for construction materials, such as brick, masonry, or similar to the exterior finish of the building. Ms. McPherson suggested that the Commission approve the ordinance amendment as proposed at this time, and the Commission could either tour the city or staff could provide photos of neighborhood development signs before making a decision on whether or not they wished to fine-tune the ordinance as it relates to materials. Issues such as aesthetics and minimum standards for residential, commercial and industrial developments could be discussed at the October workshop meeting and a second amendment could be processed. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON WITHDREW THE MOTION TO APPROVE. COMMISSIONER LEMKE WITHDREW THE SECOND.