Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />OCTOBER 26, 2005 <br />Montour pointed out that in Che immediate vicinity of AE Sign Systems <br />there are seven signs for five businesses on three pylons. Montour felt it <br />would be a great improvement if the businesses could get together and <br />consolidate their signage. Wethern did not believe the businesses would <br />be willing to put up a $50,000 to $60,000 sign to accomplish what <br />Montour was suggesting. <br />Allan stated that her position is that the City's current ordinance should <br />remain as is. Blesener agreed given there was no consensus on an <br />acceptable timeframe for allowing messages Co change at this point. <br />Keis agreed that electronic reader boards are an improvement over the <br />hand-changed message boards, but agreed that the 3 second timeframe for <br />changing messages was too quick. He also indicated that the 24 hour <br />timeframe may not be reasonable. The question was what is reasonable. <br />Montour stated that in his business the standard is for reader boards to be <br />changed twice per day. Montour suggested that Wethern could try the 24 <br />hour standard for now, and bring the matter back to the Council in 6 <br />months if he still feels strongly about it. <br />Wethern indicated that his current location may not be feasible for him if <br />he cannot have the sign that he is requesting as he will not be able to <br />attract business off the street. <br />Allan again stated that her position was that no change should be made to <br />the ordinance at this time. She noted Chat Chis is Che first request that the <br />City has received for an electronic reader board with a changing message. <br />Allan felt the sign would be workable under the current code that allows <br />the message to change once per day. <br />There was no one else present fi•om the general public wishing to <br />comment on this matter. <br />Upon motion by LaValle, seconded by Allan, the public hearing was <br />closed. <br />Montour felt that the proposal was an opportunity for Che City Co get some <br />signage that was more technologically advanced. Blesener stated Chat iC <br />was his feeling that the Code should remain the same at this time. <br />Blesener instructed the City Planner to do a more in-depth study of the <br />issue and determine what other cities are doing, specifically with regard to <br />message change sequence and timing. Keis agreed. He stated that there <br />is likely an acceptable alternative to a 24 hour message change and a 3 <br />second message change. <br />4 <br />