My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-23-2005 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
03-23-2005 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/13/2012 10:29:35 AM
Creation date
4/13/2012 10:24:50 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
65
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MIN UTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />FEBRUARY 23, 2005 <br />LaValle noted that the architectural guidelines speak against this type of <br />sign. LaValle indicated that if the City deviates for State Farm, it will <br />have to deviate for others with similar requests. <br />Walstrom felt that the Market Square Town Office location was not <br />dissimilar from the Market Place Shopping Center where the plastic logo <br />sign was allowed. The Planner pointed out that the Market Square Town <br />Office property is zoned PHD, therefore, signage is negotiated. He also <br />noted that the property is subject to the architectural guidelines which <br />speak against plastic panel signage. The Planner noted that the Market <br />Place Shopping Center has an approved comprehensive sign plan, but he <br />did not recall the details of that plan. <br />The City Administrator reported that under the architectural guidelines, <br />the plastic panel sign would not be allowed at the Market Place Shopping <br />Center. The Administrator indicated that he had discussed with Walstrom <br />the potential for placing the sign in a window. <br />Walstrom indicated that he discussed signage with the City Planner and <br />City Administrator the past April or May prior to purchasing his town <br />office. The indication was that it would be O.K. to move the sign over. <br />The Administrator indicated that he informed Walstrom that the backlit <br />sign would not be allowed on the building, and the discuss was that it may <br />be acceptable to place the sign in a window. The Administrator also <br />recallecl conversation that a sign with individually it letters may be <br />acceptable. <br />Walstrom indicated that he thought that he had covered this issue prior to <br />his purchase of the town office_ Walstrom again indicated the difficulty <br />that his clients are having in locating his office, and hoped he could put <br />signage on the side of the building. <br />LaValle noted that whatever is done for Walstrom would establish a <br />precedent, and the City would have to approve similar requests from other <br />owners in the town office complex. <br />Montour suggested that once the office identification signs and monument <br />signage is installed, the problem may be resolved. <br />Blesener encouraged Walstrom to meet with the City Planner to explore <br />the options available to him. <br />There was no one else present from the general public wishing to <br />comment 011 this matter. <br />8 <br />-1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.