VN-146 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1. At the time the new ground sign is erected on 5th St., •all other groundsigns, other than the two approved if they are approved, should be removed. 2. We would suggest a condition stating that no permits shall be issued for wall signs.. that shall be ler~ible from 5th St, or 35W. Smaller wall signs, st:~'ictly for the purpose of internal identificaticn, would be permittede 'The intent of this would be to prevent some future tenant from erecting additional wall signs on the west facing wall. of the building in .order to identify himself to 35W. At the Planning Commission meeting some concern was expressed regarding whether the directory sign was being .erected on the same property as E-Z Mini Storage or whether this was a separate parcel.. .At the time E-Z Mini Storage. was constructed, the applicant was required to combine the two parcels into one and this has bean done so that both the. sign on the freeway and on~5th 5t. are located on the same property as the E-7 Mini Storage buildings. This,- of course, does not speak at all to the possibility that the` property would be redivided in the future and that a future tenant could come in who would require additional signing. Planninct Commission Discussions 8-1g-75s Bohling read the. background discussion. Mr. Hanson, manager of E-Z F2ini Storage, was present to answer questions.. The City Manager reviewed ordinance requirements for sign variances and the normal Code requirements for-this type of development. He also noted that the setback for the ground sign would have to be 13 1/? feet from the 5th St. property line and that the distance from -the pavement is irrelevant. He stated that the 13 1/3 feet should be a condition of granting the variance since it is not part, of the variance request.