SP-078 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

April 11, 1980 APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT TO SP-78, RICE CREEK CENTER SIGN PLAN PURPOSE To consider a request to modify the sign plan for the Rice Creek Center. BACKGROUND The City Council approved SP-78 on October 25, 1977. The special use permit established the sign plan for the Rice Creek Center. On February 15, 1980 the property owne~ made application to amend the sign plan in regard to signage for the arcade tenants. The Board of Review at its regular meeting on February 19, 1980 reviewed a request by the property owner for a directory sign listing arcade tenants that would eliminate the existing arcade tenant signage area on the south side of the building (see attached si~n plan map). The proposed directory sign would be. located on themansard roof area above the south entrance to the arcade. After the Planning Commission 'acted on the matter, the property owner informed staff that the tenants were not agreeable to removing the existing arcade tenant signs. At its regular meeting on March 18, 1980, the Board of Review recommended that the Council refer the application for an amended SP-78 back to the Board of Review aridappl~cant. The applicant's present proposal is attached for review. It appears that since there is such a variety of tenants in the arcade area that the two signable areas is requested. Retail type tenants desire the signage the way it presently exists. Professional/ service type businesses desire the directory sign. In regard to the two signable ~reas, the zoning code for typical commercial buildings allows only one signable area per side of the building. If the signable area for the arcade tenants that presently exists was designed for use by all arcade tenants it stands to reason if there are two signable areas, the area of the existing signable area could be reduced in size. Also if the directory sign first proposed was designed for all arcade tenants it also seems logical this sign could be reduced in size. Not knowing or having no way of predicting future tenants and the signage desired by those tenants it is impossible to accurately recommend the size of either signable area. In respect to this application allowing the tenants to determine the type of signage they want, staff has the following comments: