03/20/08 Special Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Mr. Gandel stated that it is not a perpetual problem, but there have been a few tenants that have abused this privilege from time to time. He stated that with the LED sign they would be in a better position to provide limitations. He stated that he has seen as many as 3 signs of this type up at a time. He stated that the owners also find this frustrating because they feel this type of sign "dumbs" down the comer and the property as a whole. Member Elvig stated that he knows there have been issues with signs and noted that signs on Hwy 10, such as the ones put on the back of trailers, are against City policy. He stated that there should be a recommendation that if this sign proposal moves forward, these types of signs will be forbidden. Member Jeffrey asked if the proposed signs need a variance or fits all the criteria for monument and display signs. Economic Development Coordinator Sullivan stated that Associate Planner DaInes put together an outline at the last meeting that covered this information. He stated that all signs, except for those by MnDOT will require a CUP and this sign may just require an amended CUP. Member Jeffrey asked if there had been any precedent set by either the City or the EDA surrounding private business signage. He stated that this sign will announce a strip mall and not a business park. Economic Development Director Sullivan noted that per the discussion at the last EDA meeting, the monument type signs are directional location signs and the LED sign is more of a marketing type sign. He stated that there was not a Consensus by the group whether this is a good idea or a bad idea. Member LeTourneau noted that in the past, the EDA has not focused on retail. Economic Development Director Sullivan stated that originally this was funded by the EDA through the revolving loan fund, but the qualifications for this funding has changed and excludes retail. He stated that this would be the second time the EDA has looked at assisting retail directly. Member Elvig cautioned giving the impression that the EDA IS "focusing" on retail. He suggested that better terminology may be "expanding" on retail. Economic Development Coordinator Sullivan stated that this situation is very unique and may not be precedent setting because of the possible impact of the median construction. He stated that if the median wasn't going to be constructed, the City would not even be considering involvement. Member Jeffrey stated that he feels that point needs to be made very clearly, so the next retail building that comes to the City isn't expecting the City to pay for their signage also. Economic Development Authority/March 20, 2008 Page 3 of8