Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTF.S <br />City Council <br />Marcli 21, 1984 <br />Signs (Cont.) Kathy TipLer, 2800 Lakeside Court, appeared before the Council as <br />a citi.zen-at-large. Mrs. Tipler f.elt thaC the citizens of the <br />communi.ty should be represented i.n Chi.s maCter as we11 as the <br />business community. <br />Ms. Ti.pler fel.t that Che temporary signs were a bloC on the landscape. <br />Tipler felt that busi.ness people should realize that consumers are <br />loolci.ng for a Uusiness that loolcs lilce it wi.ll. be in business for. a <br />long time. Tipler di.d not feel that temporary si.gns instilled <br />conf:idence i.n the consumer for the business. <br />7'i.pler did not see any reason why the City coul<t not loolc good. <br />Tipler felt that business shottld have permanent lootcing signs an<l <br />the junlc on the roadway shoulc.( be removed. <br />hlrs. Nardini reported thaC the Chamber of Commerce was i.nformed <br />that toni.ght's meetino was not a public hear:i.nn, but was a workshop <br />for the Council on the Si.~n Committee's recommendations. Ilowever, <br />if anyone hact some strong concerns that they wanted heard, the Council <br />would hear them. <br />Mr. Fahey repor.ted thaT. one of the items the Sign Commi.ttee broupht <br />up is that when someone advertised a sale, i.t was generally for a <br />two ~oeelc period and the present 7 ciay temporary sign li.mitation was <br />a hardship. <br />Mrs. Scalze pointed out that the temporary sign limitaci.on of seven <br />days provided a ~vay to adverti.se a grand openi.n~ or going out of <br />business sale. Scalze clid not feel that 7 days was too great a <br />restricti.on. <br />P9rs. Nardi-ni commented that Or<tinance 209 was amended ~lay 25, 1983 <br />which placed this seven day ].i.mi.tati.on. <br />Mr. Pahey poi.nted out that a~rand openi_ng may run more than 7 days <br />and pointed ouC that Christmas holiday sales run longer than 7 days, <br />The Planner reported Chat the Counci.l amended C11e sign ordinance <br />i.n hlay of 19H3 at the eequest oF the business community. Previous <br />to this si~nap,e coas based on street classification and now the <br />ordi_nance :is based on square f.ooCage of a building. <br />The I~laner reported that studi.es have been done wi.th relation to <br />s:i~;nap.,e on speed l.imi.ts on streets. llowever, the Council wiped out <br />this considerati.on when the ordinance was amended. <br />The PLanner commented that the Counc~i.l has t:o consi.der si.gnage for <br />identifi.cation versus adverti.sing. <br />The Planner stated that he did not understand why the business <br />communi.tv wants to sign their buildi.ngs to the poinC where no one <br />Page. -7- <br />