Laserfiche WebLink
Commissioner VanScoy stated that if the City continues on this path, Ramsey will face a forest of <br /> signs in this area. He asked if the business would be in agreement with a monument sign. <br /> Mr. Tauscheck replied that although that could be a possibility, it would not be visible from the <br /> highway. <br /> Commissioner VanScoy stated that this is another reason the City needs to expedite its review of <br /> the sign ordinance. <br /> Senior Planner McGuire Brigl stated that staff originally believed that this sign would be <br /> administratively approved but the City Attorney suggested that the Commission review this <br /> request because although allowed in the district, the language is not clear. <br /> Commissioner VanScoy stated that The COR is not intended to be the typical suburban <br /> development and he is having difficulty continuing to support these types of requests. He <br /> recognized that visibility is important for retail and commercial businesses along Highway 10. He <br /> stated that although the master sign plan addresses that intent, it has not yet been accomplished. <br /> He stated that he would support a monument sign along the highway that would be visible to <br /> support these businesses, similar to the City signs near the rail station and Ramsey Boulevard. He <br /> agreed that visibility is critical but did not believe that ending up with multiple signs is the <br /> intention. <br /> City Planner Anderson read language from The COR design framework related to allowed signage. <br /> Commissioner VanScoy stated that he finds it difficult to support this situation. <br /> Chairperson Bauer referenced the location of this property and the two vacant lots that have interest <br /> from two potential businesses. He asked if there could be shared signage for those three parcels. <br /> Senior Planner McGuire Brigl stated that the two vacant parcels are both owned by the City and <br /> will come forward for a lot split and therefore the City could ask for shared signage at that time. <br /> She stated that the City can still look into shared monument signage but that would be further into <br /> the future. She reviewed the type of signage that could be approved administratively, noting that <br /> this traditional ground sign would be preferred to what could be allowed under the Code. <br /> Chairperson Bauer asked if the business would be open to building signage at this time and waiting <br /> for the future development of the adjacent parcels in attempt for shared signage. <br /> Mr. Tauscheck stated that while he understands the intent he could not speak for the business. <br /> Commissioner Johnson asked why the business does not use one of the open spaces on the <br /> Coborn's sign. <br /> Mr. Tauscheck replied that there is another property owner and location for that sign, and it would <br /> not be New Horizon's space to take. <br /> Planning Commission/March 5, 2020 <br /> Page 3 of 6 <br />