Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic District Signage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Plan Commission approves replacement sign faces and wall signs for 22201 North Main Street, with a depth confirmation condition
Summary
Commission accepted a proposal to replace a pylon sign face and approved two new building wall signs at 22201 North Main Street (downtown historic mixed-use district) after historic preservation committee review; staff requested the applicant confirm sign depth does not exceed the 12-inch ordinance limit.
The Fort Atkinson Plan Commission on July 8 reviewed and approved a sign replacement and building-mounted signs for the property at 22201 North Main Street in the downtown historic mixed-use district, subject to confirmation the wall signs will be less than the 12-inch maximum depth allowed by city ordinance.
Jed Draeger, director of neighborhood and building services, explained the application includes replacement of an existing pylon sign face along Madison Avenue and two new building signs. Because the building signs sit in the historic mixed-use district, they required review by both the Planning Commission and the Historic Preservation Committee (HPC). Draeger said the pylon sign face is an existing, nonconforming element and replacement does not require Plan Commission approval but does require a sign permit; the applicant presented the replacement for the commission’s feedback.
Draeger said the Historic Preservation Committee reviewed and approved the two new wall signs but had suggested enlarging a line of text (the applicant accommodated that suggestion). HPC also flagged a potential concern about the signs’ illumination relative to nearby lighting from an adjacent McDonald’s; Draeger said placement and height of the signs should limit that effect. Staff recommended approval with a condition: the applicant must provide confirmation the wall signs’ depth will be less than the 12-inch maximum allowed by ordinance.
Commissioners offered several design comments: one member suggested removing the phrase “parking lot” from the pylon sign to avoid redundancy and potential confusion about which businesses the lot serves; others discussed pedestrian circulation through the adjacent parking areas and suggested staff and property owners might consider future pedestrian improvements. Draeger said staff will pass those comments to the property owner and that the pylon face replacement will proceed through staff sign-permit review.
A motion to approve the wall signs with the condition on sign depth passed on a voice vote; commissioners indicated assent by saying “aye.” No public opposition was recorded during the discussion.
