04-19-2004 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

FiU «04-29T7 JtAMry 20.2004 rat«S«fll applicant is proposing two light poles (discussed in the lighting section of this report) with the sign connecting them. The sign meets the requirements of Section 78*! 468. but the specific design of the sign and how it will tie into the lighting poles should be discussed with the applicant. The incorporation of stone planters and iron railings, as pioposed, seems appropriate. The applicant is also proposing a sign, 6* x 4* w/a planter box and poles, at the comer of Shcrelinc Drive and Kelly Avenue. The location of the sign may need to be revised should the proposed layout of the existing gravel lot change. This sign will be a multi tenant sign listing the businesses that occupy the front of the building This sign meets the requirements of Section 78-1468 and will be subject to 10' setback. In addition, staff would recommend the following; • The sign be re-oriented to be perpendicular to Shoreline Drive • The sign be monument style (no poles) Lastly, an existing pole sign for Navarre Lanes/The Cnb is located n tlie right-of-way along Kelly Avenue. This sign is in need of repair and currently isn't illuminated. The applicant has expressed his willingness to work with the Planning Convnission and City Council towards a signage plan that would be fimctional and visually appealing. The Planning Commission should consider elimination of this sign and allowing a larger sign at the northeast comer of Shoreline Drive and Kelly Avenue which would iiicorpo.'ate all the businesses occupying the building A new directional sign, possibly 3' x 3’ could be placed at the Kelly A^ enue entrance, out of the nght of-way. The Zoning Ordinance would limit the size of all new signs to SO s.f Currently, 389 s f of signage is proposed when S29 s.f. is allowed, leaving the applicant 140 s.f. to work with. Staff would not recommend that th. Planning Commission encourage the applicant to max-out h:s allowable signage, but there is room to allow for a larger sign at the northeast corner of the site and a small directional sign at the Kelly Avenue entrance. Landscaping Plan The applicant has not provided a landscape plan. The eastern and r.o7thc.m property boundaries abut right-of-way and the western boundary abuts a.nothcr B-1 zoned property, not providing any opportunities for additional landscaping The southern property boundary has a tree line and fence which provides screening to the residential property to the south. The Plaiuung Commission should discuss whether this existing vegeution is adequate for screening (see Exhibit OS). There arc also three other potential areas for landscaping: 1) The area between the 2-tier retaining wall system separating the upper gravel parking lot from the lower parking lot (see Exhibit 04), 2) The planter boxes proposed at the top of the proposed stairway system, and. 3) The planter box proposed for the signage at the northeast comer of the lot. The Planning Commission should discuss requiring implementation of some type of landscaping in these three areas in an effort to provide additional green space on property. Additionally, as noted previously, the provision of 20 ’/10* green space yards along Shoreline Drive and Kelly Avenue should be considered for the gravel lot. This