Loading...
Planning Commission Minutes 09-04-2007MINUTES MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Is Tuesday, September 4th, 2007 6:00 PM Commissioners: Rod Dragsten, Charlotte Gabler, Lloyd Hilgart, William Spartz, and Barry Voight Council Liaison: Brian Stumpf Staff: Angela Schumann, Gary Anderson, Kimberly Holien and Steve Grittman — NAC 1. Call to order. Chairman Dragsten called the meeting to order and noted a full quorum of the Commission. 2. Approval of the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of August 7th, 2007. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HILGART TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF AUGUST 7, 2007. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GABLER. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0. 3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda. • NONE. 4. Citizen comments. NONE. 5. Public Hearing — Consideration of a request for variance to allow an off -site sign as a principal use. Applicant: St. Benedict's Senior Community Schumann provided the staff report, explaining that the St. Benedict's Senior Community has submitted an application for an off -premise sign to be located at the northeast corner of the intersection of It" Street and the St. Benedict's Senior Community driveway. As discussed at a previous meeting, Schumann stated that the original sign identifying St. Benedict's was displaced with the re -alignment of 7t' Street. The proposed sign location is on the Home Depot property, on the east side of the St. Benedict's driveway. It is 661 square feet in area and was chosen due to placement space and safety issues, which were illustrated by the applicant in a previous presentation to the Planning Commission. Schumann noted that the Planning Commission previously approved a simple subdivision, amendment to CUP for PUD, rezoning, and variance to setback to accommodate the proposed sign. Due to a change in the application process regarding St. Henry's Catholic Church, the rezoning, variance to setback and amendment to PUD are no longer applicable. However, with St. Henry's choosing not to participate in the process, the variance to off -premise signage and signage as a principal use of a parcel are required to accomplish the sign placement. Schumann noted that a revised Memorandum of Understanding to resolve the issue of sign placement has been prepared and has been attached for reference. Planning Commission Minutes — 09/04/07 Schumann indicated that the approvals required to accommodate the proposed sign are now the simple subdivision, which has been approved, and a variance to allow the sign as an off -site use on the newly subdivided parcel. Schumann reported that the proposed sign has been revised since the last report to the Commission. The proposed sign now meets ordinance requirements; variances are not needed for height and area. In terms of the variance request, a hardship was created for the applicant with the realignment of 7th Street. As part of this project, the St. Benedict's driveway was extended and the existing sign was displaced. St. Benedict's does not have frontage on 7th Street, and an easement is in place to accommodate their driveway. As such, an on -premise sign would not be visible from 7th Street. Schumann stated that the Monticello Zoning Ordinance section 3-9[D] prohibits off -premise signs. However, as St. Benedict's does not have frontage on 7th Street, a variance to allow an off -site sign as may be appropriate. The City will not set a precedent for future variance requests for off premise signs due to the very specific and unusual nature of the hardship. Chairman Dragsten opened the public hearing. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Dragsten closed the public hearing. Spartz stated the applicant had proved previously that there are clearly safety issues which warrant the replacement of the sign at the proposed location. Dragsten concurred that a hardship does exist, which supports the variance. • MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SPARTZ TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN OFF -SITE SIGN ON THE SUBJECT PARCEL AS IDENTIFIED IN THE 09/04/07 STAFF REPORT, BASED ON FINDINGS AS FOLLOWS: a. St. Benedict's only access to a public street consists of a private drive; St. Benedict's has no frontage on a public street. b. The private drive was extended due to the realignment of 7th Street. c. The existing sign, which was at the comer of the private drive and previous alignment of 7th Street, is no longer visible due to the realignment of 7th Street. The lack of signage has presented a clear safety issue for the residents and visitors to the facility. Therefore, an undue hardship was created by the realignment of 7th Street. d. The proposed sign as shown in the exhibits for the 09/04/07 Planning Commission report will be located at the comer of the private drive and realigned 7d' Street and will allow traffic to route safely into the approved PUD for St. Benedict's. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VOIOHT. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0. 6. Public Hearing — Consideration of a reauest for Conditional Use Permit for Comprehensive Sian Plan for a commercial/retail complex in the Central Communitv District Applicant: Seluemed, LLC Planner Holien presented the staff report. Holien stated that the ordinance requires that signage for a use described as a shopping center or mall by code requires the consideration of a conditional use permit. The proposed use fits that description and therefore a CUP may be considered for determining Planning Commission Minutes — 09/04/07 the sign allowance for the entire building. Holien explained that Seluemed, LLC is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for a Comprehensive Sign Plan for a multi -tenant retail/office building. The building is designed with seven tenant spaces and is located at 508 State Highway 25 S. The site is zoned CCD, Central Community District, and was formerly occupied by Maus Foods. Holien reported that in determining the amount of allowed signage, a maximum of 5 percent of the gross area of the front silhouette applies to the principal building where the total allowable sign area is distributed among the several businesses. The proposed site has frontage on both Highway 25 and Sixth Street. Therefore, both the northwest and south elevations have been taken into account when determining the silhouette of the building. Based on the elevations provided, the silhouette of these elevations has been calculated at 7,264 square feet. Holien stated that the allowable wall signage for the site is 364 square feet. The applicant is proposing 358 square feet of wall signage, within the parameters of the ordinance. Holien stated that the building may have one pylon or freestanding sign identifying the building. The applicant is proposing to retain existing pylon, which is setback 19 from property line. They are proposing a new face for the sign. For sites having Highway 25 frontage, the code allows a maximum of 100 square feet and 22' in height. The sign meets the maximum size and height by ordinance. Holien stated that the proposed pylon will have placards for up to 9 tenants and a message board. Holien noted that the ordinance for temporary signs, which limits a building to 40 days, applies to the entire site. Holien indicated that as the signage plan meets all height and area requirements as defined by the zoning ordinance, staff recommends approval as presented. 0 Chairman Dragsten opened the public hearing. Hearing no comment, Chairman Dragsten closed the public hearing. Gabler clarified that the conditional use permit is for signage only. Holien responded that was correct. Bill Demueles, property owner and applicant representative, made himself available for questions. Dragsten asked the applicant if they would be changing the facade. Demueles confirmed. Dragsten asked if the sign would be a clip -on or electronic message board. Holien indicated that it would not make a difference in terms of the code. Demueles stated that they have not decided. Voight stated that the proposed building improvements look good and that it is nice to see an existing building be re -used. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER VOIGHT TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A COMPREHENSIVE SIGN PLAN AS PRESENTED, BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED SIGNAGE IS WITHIN THE ALLOWED PARAMETERS OF THE ORDINANCE AND CONSISTENT WITH THE CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HILGART. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0. 7. Public Hearing — Consideration of a reauest for Conditional Use Permit for cross narking for a nronosed restaurant/banauet facility in the Central Community District. Annlicant: Masters 5t' Avenue Planning Commission Minutes — 09/04/07 Holien presented the staff report, stating that the applicant is seeking a conditional use permit for joint parking in order to accommodate a banquet or restaurant use. The applicant is not proposing any exterior remodeling, but rather shifting the banquet space into the existing space. Holien stated that the original site plan included 60 off-street parking stalls. By ordinance for the CCD, the applicant only needs to provide 60% of the total required parking stalls. The total required is 47 stalls for this application. As with the previous arrangement, 60% of the required is 29 parking stalls. Including the previous spaces used by the office space, there are 12 stalls located on site for this use. As part of the joint parking arrangement, the applicant is proposing to use 17 stalls at the David's Photography site, located across Broadway, and 6 parking stalls at the NAPA site at 224 3'd Street West. Holien reported that the applicant had indicated that the David's Photography spaces would be used for employee parking. Holien outlined the conditions of approval, referring to the cross -parking requirements of the ordinance. She noted that at this time, the applicant hasn't provided hours of operation for the proposed cross parking partners. Staff has asked the applicant to provide the hours. Due to the nature of the uses, staff does not expect a conflict. Holien stated that the second ordinance requirement is a for legal cross document, approved and executed by City Attorney. Holien reported that letters have been provided, but if approved, the applicant will need to provide a legal agreement. Holien stated that the banquet space use is supported by the comprehensive plan and that staff are recommending approval, subject to conditions in Exhibit Z. Voight asked about how parking would work for NAPA, as it shares space with the hardware store. Voight asked about the influence on parking at those locations, particularly with seasonal displays. Holien indicated that seasonal uses would be reviewed with temporary permits. This cross -easement would supercede that and be accounted for in calculating remaining space available for the seasonal permit. Gabler asked about safety for the parking across Broadway. She questioned whether there is a clearly marked crosswalk. Holien stated that she was unsure. However, the David's Photography parking was to be employee parking only. Holien noted that there is no crosswalk to the NAPA. Dragsten asked if David's Photography has the stated number of parking spaces available and questioned the hours of operation. Stumpf clarified that the parking stalls indicated are present. Chairman Dragten opened the public hearing. David Hytstten, David's Photography, spoke to the Commission. He stated that there are four businesses located in his building. All are professional offices. He indicated that use of all the stalls is very rare. He stated that peak use is almost always during the day. Hytsten stated that he sees no conflict with the hours. He also noted that there are two crosswalks for Broadway at this location and that they are clearly marked. Chairman Dragsten closed the public hearing. Dragsten stated that the main requirement to be satisfied is for the applicant to provide the hours of operation for cross -parking businesses. Barry Fluth, property owner, presented hours of operation for the stated businesses. Fluth also presented a letter from nine other downtown business owners supporting the change. 11 Planning Commission Minutes — 09/04/07 Dragsten asked Fluth if he is familiar with Exhibit Z. Fluth confirmed. Dragsten inquired if Fluth would be expanding into the vacated office area. Fluth replied that they would be. Hilgart asked if a current business within the building is expanding. Fluth answered that was correct. Dragsten asked for the hours of operation to be reviewed by the time the item got to the City Council. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HILGART TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR OFF -SITE PARKING FOR LANDMARK SQUARE, BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED ARRANGEMENT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND WILL NOT HAVE AN ADVERSE AFFECT ON THE SURROUNDING AREA, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OUTLINED IN EXHIBIT Z AS FOLLOWS: 1. The applicant shall provide information on the hours of operation for all interested parties. 2. A properly drawn legal instrument executed by the parties concerned for joint use of off-street parking facilities shall be provided. Said legal instrument shall be approved by the City Attorney, filed with the City Administrator and recorded with the County Recorder, Wright County. 3. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of previously approved permits as they relate to the site. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SPARTZ. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0. 8. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for Revlat and Final Plat for First Minnesota Bank Commercial, a commercial plat in the CCD (Central Community District). Applicant: 1 St Minnesota Bank Holien reviewed the staff report, stating that the applicants are requesting approval for a two -lot subdivision and variance for additional curb cut. The subject site is located in the southeast corner of the intersection of Highway 25 and 4th Street East. The site is 43,771 square feet in size and is zoned CCD, Central Community District. Holien stated that the Comprehensive Plan designates this area for a mix of land uses. She indicated that the purpose of the CCD District is to implement the plans and policies of the Monticello Downtown Revitalization Plan and to establish and continue development of a traditional downtown area in Monticello's primary commercial core. The applicant is proposing to consolidate three existing lots for the purpose of subdividing them into two lots. Holien explained that the site is currently platted as lots 7, 8, 9, and 10 of Block 16 of the original Monticello Plat. Lot 1, Block 1 is approximately 35,684 square feet in area. Lot 1, Block 2 is approximately 8,087 square feet in area. Holien noted that the narrative submitted by the applicant states that the subdivision is being proposed to provide a new entrance into First Minnesota Bank. Currently, traffic into the site utilizes an existing access of Highway 25. A second access is located off 4th Street East, intended for use as an exit from the drive through. This access is prefaced with a "DO NOT ENTER" sign facing 4th Street. The applicant has cited safety concerns with this configuration, as cars often attempt to enter the site from the 4th Street access, interfering with traffic exiting the drive through lanes. that the proposed Lot 1 Block i contains the First Minnesota Bank, accessory Holien indicatedp p , parking and drive through facilities, a garage, and three sheds. The existing conditions on the Planning Commission Minutes — 09/04/07 bank site are not changing as a result of the subdivision. The proposed Lot 2, Block 1 contains a single family home. As part of the project, the applicant is proposing to move the garage onto Lot 2. All three sheds will be demolished and removed. In terms of parking, Holien stated that the existing bank building is approximately 5,024 square feet in area. The parking lot accessory to the use contains 19 stalls. A minimum of 25 spaces is required for the use. Holien reported that a reduction to the required number of parking stalls was approved as part of the initial CUP for the site to allow a larger public open space. The applicant is now proposing to construct 8 additional parking stalls to the east, for a total of 27 stalls. The applicant is therefore satisfying the minimum requirement. Holien stated that no additional landscaping is proposed as part of the project. However, staff recommends that the applicant provide plantings along the east side of the proposed drive, in addition to the six foot fence. Evergreen trees or similar dense plantings in this area will further assist in buffering the proposed driveway from the single family home to the east. Staff recommends that the applicant also provide plantings on the west side of the proposed driveway, adjacent to the existing single family home on Lot 2, Block 1. No photometric plan was submitted with the application. Therefore, it appears as though no additional lighting is proposed for the site. Any lighting proposed for the site shall be required to comply with Chapter 3 Section 2-H of the Zoning Ordinance. Holien also noted that no additional signage has been proposed. Holien reviewed access and circulation for the proposed configuration, stating that the bank site currently has access off Highway 25 to the west side of the site, and off 4t' Street on the north side of the site. The 4h Street access is intended for egress, for cars exiting the drive through lane. As stated above, the applicant has cited safety concerns with this configuration, as cars often attempt to enter the site from the 4 h Street access, interfering with traffic exiting the drive through lanes. The applicant has also cited safety concerns with the access off Highway 25, particularly with left -turn movements. The applicant is proposing an additional access off 4`h Street, in the northeast corner of the site. This access will be located east of the single family home, approximately 135 feet east of the existing 4 h Street driveway. The access is proposed to be approximately 38 feet east of the driveway for the single family home. This driveway will be used for ingress and egress and is proposed at a width of 24 feet, wide enough for two lanes of traffic. The curb cut is 10 feet from the side lot line. The driveway curves to the west, connecting with the existing bank parking lot. A privacy fence six feet in height is proposed on the east side of the driveway, buffering the drive from the existing house to the east. Holien stated that the bank property is entitled to one curb cut for each 125 feet of street frontage. Lot 1, Block 1 has approximately 198 feet of frontage along 4t' Street. A total of 250 feet of street frontage is required for a second curb cut on 4t' Street. A variance is required to accommodate the proposed curb cut. The site has a total of 365 feet of street frontage, including frontage along 4thStreet and Highway 25. The single family home has a single access off 4`h Street, approximately 190 feet east of the intersection of 4th Street and Highway 25. The existing curb cut is approximately 10 feet in width. As proposed, the subdivision will result in a side yard setback of 4 feet for the driveway. The required setback for curb cuts in residential districts is 3 feet. The subject site is a residential use in the CCD. Therefore, the proposed setback may be appropriate. Holien stated that City staff agree with traffic safety for Highway 25, which supports the additional driveway on 4t'. However, staff is concerned that the plan presented does not eliminate hardship the cited for Highway 25. She stated that staff are therefore recommending removing the access on 0 Planning Commission Minutes — 09/04/07 Highway 25. Mn/DOT would be supportive of elimination of the access. With that notation, Holien stated that staff are recommending approval, with the conditions as noted. Voight inquired if the new driveway is an entrance and exit. Holien replied that it is. Voight asked if it had been discussed to have an entrance only on 0 Street. Holien noted that conversation had been held, but the bank preferred the current configuration due to circulation patterns. Holien noted that the ATM is located on the drive through. Chairman Dragsten opened the public hearing. Bob Viering, president of 1 st MN Bank, 104 E. 4th Street, and Jon Bogart, Bogart Pederson, civil engineers for the site, addressed the Commission. Bogart commented that he appreciates staff s comments. However, he stated that he would like to propose an alternative on Highway 25, which is to keep the access open but change it to a right -in only. Bogart stated that this is really the way traffic circulates through the site now. He indicated that the primary issue is that people are using the drive -through exit as an entrance, There is also a danger in letting traffic back up onto 25. However, if the Highway 25 access is closed completely, the bank loses usage of the last couple of parking spaces. Additionally, Viering noted that a great deal of traffic comes in and flows through the site from that direction. Viering stated that the right -in condition off Highway 25 would alleviate many of the issues, but still accommodate this movement. Voight asked how the new configuration would be advertised to customers. Viering stated that the bank had planned on mailings and stuffers to let them know. Dragsten stated that they would need to modify their Highway 25 driveway. Voight stated that he can see existing customers turning in, realizing their mistake and getting stuck and then backing up traffic. Stumpf stated that customers will try that movement more than once, unless the applicant comes up with a way to only make a right turn, which this configuration doesn't seem to show. Voight clarified that Stumpf is talking about entering off southbound Highway 25 only. Stumpf stated that he is talking about both. Bogart stated that there will be a sign on the pavement. Bogart stated that with the realignment of the entrance, drivers will think twice about doing that more than once. Viering stated that only a small percentage of persons make that turn now. Stumpf and Bogart stated that they now go in through the out because the left hand turn is so dangerous. Bogart stated that what they are trying to do is eliminate a lot of the concern about the left-hand turn from Highway 25. Stumpf asked if Mn/DOT is even agreeable to this plan. Holien noted that the plan is subject to Mn/DOT approval. Stump asked how wide the curb cut is. Bogart responded that it is 24' . Stumpf stated that he would like to see it remain open, although an island is needed. Dragsten asked why the bank is keeping the existing house. Viering stated that at this time, they are not sure what they will do with the house long-term. He indicated that they have a residential tenant for the next nine months. He stated that at this time, the bank has no desire to make it commercial, as there is not enough space for parking, and it would require too many changes to make it commercial. However, Viering stated that the house is structurally sound. Dragsten commented that it is a nice older home. Dragsten noted that this becomes a legal non -conforming lot. Holien noted that there is no minimum lot area requirement in CCD. Viering noted that he has talked with the neighboring property owner regarding fencing, buffering and lighting. Dragsten confirmed that the applicant had seen Exhibit Z. Viering confirmed and stated that the conditions present no issues, except as related tot eh Highway 25 access. 7 Planning Commission Minutes — 09/04/07 Stumpf stated that conditions 2 and 4 are contingent on condition 1. Dragsten confirmed that if the Commission chose to eliminate number 1, 2 and 4 would also be eliminated. Holien noted that City Engineer Westby had an opportunity to review the plan as proposed. All conditions from his memo are still applicable. Westby did indicate that a right turn in only would alleviate a majority of concerns. David Hytstten, owner of David's Photography, spoke to the Commission and indicated that he is a customer of l st MN. He stated that he does come from north and if he had an alternative entrance, he would use it. Hearing no further comment, Chairman Dragsten closed the public hearing. Voight asked what the amended conditions would read. Holien responded that they would allow a right -in only off of Highway 25. Voight stated that it would also be dependent on Mn/DOT approval. Holien confumed. Holien noted that as previously stated, if condition 1 changes, condition numbers 2 and 4 can be removed. Dragsten stated Mn/DOT approval would be added as a separate condition. Hilgart stated that he doesn't know if it is a good idea to leave the entrance as right -in only, as it would create more traffic volume for the adjacent house. Voight asked if Commission should add a condition regarding driveway width. Holien suggested that the City Engineer should review that item. Hilgart stated that the narrower the drive, the more it will discourage the left -in. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SPARTZ TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE CCD DISTRICT AND THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OUTLINED IN THE AMENDED EXHIBIT Z AS FOLLOWS. 1. The existing access off Highway 25 shall be revised to alleviate safety concerns with a right -in only configuration. 3. Provide typical section of driveway, including pavement and curb and gutter designs. Z Modify .lams to 17ew Gmeve& r-squkev at Tu 25 access lei. 5. Buffer landscaping shall be required on either side of the proposed driveway to provide a buffer from the existing single family homes. 6. Any lighting proposed for the site shall comply with Chapter 3 Section 2-H of the Zoning Ordinance. 7. The Highway 25 access configuration is contingent on MN/DoT approval. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GABLER. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER VOIGHT TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE FOR A SECOND CURB CUT FOR A SITE WITH LESS THAN 250 FEET OF STREET FRONTAGE, BASED ON A FINDING THAT AN UNDUE HARDSHIP EXISTS AND THAT APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE REASONABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OUTLINED IN THE Planning Commission Minutes -- 09/04/07 AMENDED EXHIBIT Z AS FOLLOWS. 1. The existing access off Highway 25 shall be revised to alleviate safety concerns with a right -in only configuration. pFeN4de iva- 3. Provide typical section of driveway, including pavement and curb and gutter designs. 4 Meth r bra at TH ? . 5. Buffer landscaping shall be required on either side of the proposed driveway to provide a buffer from the existing single family homes. 6. Any lighting proposed for the site shall comply with Chapter 3 Section 2-H of the Zoning Ordinance. 7. The Highway 25 access configuration is contingent on MN/DoT approval. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HILGART. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0. 9. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for Preliminary Plat for the proposed River City Station, a commercial plat in a B-3 (Highwav Business) District, and a request for rezoning from B-3 (Highway Business) to B-4 (Regional Business). Applicant: Chelsea Road, LLC Holien reported that the applicant had requested continuing this item to the October meeting for the purpose of providing a revised plan addressing staff s comments. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER VOIGHT TO CONTINUE THE REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE PROPOSED RIVER CITY STATION, A COMMERCIAL PLAT IN A B-3 (HIGHWAY BUSINESS) DISTRICT, AND A REQUEST FOR REZONING FROM B-3 (HIGHWAY BUSINESS) TO B-4 (REGIONAL BUSINESS). MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GABLER. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0. 10. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for Conditional Use Permit for Open and Outdoor Storage in a B-3 (Highway Business) District. Applicant: Olson Property Management Schumann reported that the application is complete, but that the applicant had requested continuing to allow for additional review. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HILGART TO CONTINUE THE REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR OPEN AND OUTDOOR STORAGE IN A B-3 (HIGHWAY BUSINESS) DISTRICT. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VOIGHT. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0. 11. Public Hearing — Consideration of a request for amendment to the Monticello Zoning Ordinance Section 3-9fEl as related to the regulation of proiecting signage in the Central Community District. Applicant: Monticello Planning Commission, Schumann reviewed the staff report, stating that the Design Advisory Team had met on July 10t' in relationship to a sign permit application for the former Stems & Vines location in Monticello. Planning Commission Minutes — 09/04/07 The sign proposed is a projecting sign, which is prohibited in most of the City, with the exception isof a small portion of the Central Community District, the "Broadway Downtown District". Schumann reported that in reviewing the sign application, the Design Advisory Team requested that the Planning Commission call for a public hearing to strike the "Broadway Downtown District" clause from the ordinance regulating projecting signs. Striking that clause would allow projecting signs in all of the CCD, in addition to other signs allowed by ordinance. Schumann referenced the Zoning Ordinance, stating that Projecting signs are defined by the as a sign, other than a wall sign, which is affixed to a building and which extends perpendicular from the building wall, including, but not limited to overhanging signs. The amendment would not change overall ordinance requirements for projecting signs. Under the amendment, signage must also meet total square footage requirements for all signs, including free-standing, projecting and wall signage, no matter what their combination of signage. Voight inquired how any potential proliferation of signs may have a negative impact on the downtown. Schumann stated that these signs may impact one's view of the streetscape. Voight questioned the need to limit the number of signs to one per business or two per building. Schumann clarified that this limitation was again to avoid clutter. Hilgart stated that the signs should be hung so as to not interfere with street traffic. MOTION BY COMMISIONER HILGART RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT OF SECTION 3-9[E] AS RELATED TO THE REGULATION OF is SIGNAGE IN THE CENTRAL COMMUNITY DISTRICT. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISIONER GABLER. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0 12. Consideration to review for discussion an inventory of development entrance monuments. Schumann presented the staff report, referring to an inventory prepared for the Commission which included the name of the development, location of sign, and property owner for all residential development monuments. Voight asked if the City was taking the position to deter applicants from installing these signs. Schumann stated that, pending future residential development, the City would not be inclined to allow further monument signs on private property. 13. Consideration to review for discussion an inventory of Citv tasks and activities. Schumann reported that City Administrator O'Neill had prepared a comprehensive listing of items and activities that the City was considering for the future, or items that were already in progress. O'Neill has asked that the Commission members provide any input on other items they would like to be listed. 14. Downtown siizn illumination. Anderson requested that the Planning Commission provide assistance to DAT group in terms of interpretation on the illumination of signage in the downtown area. The code is unclear in the determining method and means of sign illumination. Holien stated that she could prepare a memo and present a brief description. Dragsten stated that it is his understanding that signs on Broadway must be lit with exterior lighting. Beyond that, it was more case -by -case. Stumpf stated that anything that came off the wall toward the street, those had to be externally illuminated. Neon was prohibited. 10 Planning Commission Minutes — 09/04/07 Pylons can be internally lit because it is not an overhanging sign. Dragsten stated that the downtown was intended to be a walking district, and signs should be consistent with that. Dragsten stated that the interpretation should be provided for October. 14. Adjourn. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SPARTZ TO ADJOURN. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER DRAGSTEN. MOTION CARRIED. Recorder • • 11