09-22-1992 PC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Elk River Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1992 Page 8 . Commissioner Spotts stated that the businesses are also allowed pylon signs and that these could act as the third sign. Janelle Szklarski stated that in the case of gas stations, a canopy also needs a sign. Steve Rohlf indicated that a minimum size of sign may also be needed to accommodate small tenants. Commissioner Tveite questioned the signage requirements for tenants with no frontage at all. The issue of shared tenants and sub-leases was discussed in regards to dividing the signage allowed for that particular building amongst the tenants. Acting Chair Johnson opened the public hearing. There being no one for or against the item, Acting Chair Johnson closed the public hearing. The consensus of the Planning Commission was that two square feet of sign area per linear foot of building frontage be allowed in the C3 district and that the maximum size of wall signs be increased to 300 square feet. The Planning Commission also felt that three signs per occupant should be allowed with a minimum size of 50 square feet also allowed. . Commissioner spotts asked staff to check with other communities as it appears that they are leaning towards uniformity in signage for malls. Ms. Szklarski stated that strip malls are currently a conditional use permit and therefore the issue of signage can be addressed through that process. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that their recommendation into an ordinance amendment to the Planning Commission at the October 27 meeting. staff incorporate be brought back to Shimmering Discs - Steve Rohlf introduced this item by stating that the City Council had interpreted that the shimmering discs used on billboards fell within the definition of animated or flashing signs which are illegal in the City of Elk River. Mr. Rohlf further stated that it was the consensus of staff that these discs do not pose any safety hazards. Mr. Rohlf referenced the material supplied by Mr. Dick Mlodzik of Skoglund OUtdoor Advertising which outlined several cases involving the use of this glittering material. Mr. Rohlf stated that in addition to the three alternatives outlined in staff's memo dated September 14, 1992, a fourth alternative was also available. That alternative would be to change the definition of animated and flashing so as not to include this material. Dick Mlodzik, Skoglund Outdoor, stated that this material called solar rays, has been successfully used in traffic signs to prevent accidents, not cause them. He indicated that the solar ray business has been around for twenty-two years and that the City should not have an anti-business attitude towards their use. . Commissioner Minton stated that the issue before the Planning Commission was not the use of solar rays on traffic signs, but rather on advertising signs and he was concerned that by attracting attention,