Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,November 21,2016 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Barnhart displayed pictures of the proposed sign and the existing sign. Barnhart noted there is an opening <br /> space between the two legs of the sign to allow for some visibility under the sign provided no cars are <br /> parked in that area. Staff does not have a concern with visibility for cars traveling along Shoreline Drive. <br /> Barnhart stated the proposed sign appears to meet the intent of sign regulations and provides opportunities <br /> for clear commercial communication in a way that does not impact the traveling public. The subject <br /> property, due to its development pattern established over the past several decades,has limited locations <br /> for freestanding signage that would not remove parking stalls. The planned two pole structure attempts to <br /> emulate the design goals of the monument sign regulations while preserving its functionality by elevating <br /> it above the parked cars. <br /> Staff supports the variances as requested. <br /> Thiesse asked if Staff has an idea of the height of the canopies and other signs in the area. <br /> Barnhart indicated he did not measure them but noted that there are two Holiday gas stations on the east <br /> side. <br /> Barnhart displayed pictures of the nearby signs. <br /> Landgraver commented this sign appears to be taller based on the view perspectives. <br /> Barnhart stated the ordinance requirement talks about how the accessory structure should not be taller <br /> than the principal structure and this would be lower than that. <br /> Landgraver asked how the sign is lit. <br /> Ross Elenkiwich, Lunds, stated the sign is lit internally and that the only part of the sign that would be lit <br /> up is the white part. <br /> Lemke asked if the parking spaces would be reduced. <br /> Barnhart displayed an aerial photo of the site and pointed out the location of the sign. Barnhart stated the <br /> parking lot presents some challenges and that the site has been maximized from a parking perspective. <br /> Barnhart stated Staff was unable to find any additional parking spaces. <br /> Thiesse asked if the 0.0 foot setback is from the recessed area and not the real right-of-way for the road. <br /> Barnhart indicated that is correct. <br /> Lemke asked if permission needs to be obtained from the highway department or any other governmental <br /> agency for the sign. <br /> Barnhart indicated Staff did submit the proposal to the Hennepin County Transportation Department but <br /> they have not yet commented. The sign will be located entirely on the Lund's property and there should <br /> not be any additional approvals necessary. <br /> Thiesse asked if any construction would occur within the right-of-way. <br /> Page 7 of 26 <br />