My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
12/10/2003 P&Z Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Board
>
Packets
>
2003
>
12/10/2003 P&Z Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/17/2014 2:39:00 PM
Creation date
6/12/2014 1:07:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
P&Z
P&Z Document Type
P&Z Packet
Meeting Date
12/10/2003
P&Z Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
165
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
• <br />• <br />• <br />Planning & Zoning Board <br />November 12, 2003 <br />Page 17 <br />Mr. Hyden asked if he would be agreeable to only one sign on the building and nowhere <br />else. Mr. Wagner replied he would like to work this out with staff. He stated he did not <br />believe portable, rented signs would be economical for the businesses. <br />Mr. Tralle asked Mr. Wagner's opinion as to how effective the banners actually were. <br />Mr. Wagner replied he believed the specials advertised were effective in bringing in <br />customers. <br />Mr. Hyden stated it was not the City's intent to limit advertising and he realized all <br />businesses needed to advertise. <br />Mr. Tralle noted his concern was the banners got curled, dirty, and eventually fell down. <br />He asked if the stakes for the banners should be permanently mounted. <br />Mr. Corson stated his concern was banners on the right -of -way. <br />Chair Schaps thanked Mr. Wagner for coming to this meeting, but noted they still did not <br />have more than one businesses opinion. Mr. Wagner agreed signs should not be placed <br />in the right away, and he did not believe the business owners would object to a more <br />permanent structure on which to hang their banners. He asked if he could put banners on <br />his roof. <br />Chair Schaps replied the banners could be attached to the building, but not on the roof <br />Mr. Smyser stated it was the staff s intent that the business owners could obtain a sign <br />permit for one month, only for a specific number of times during the year, and not a <br />different sign every month. <br />Chair Schaps stated he did not object to having different signs put up every month and he <br />suggested a yearly permit and not make the business owners obtain a new permit every <br />month. <br />Mr. Corson stated free standing banners in the right of way would not be allowed. Mr. <br />Hyden pointed out this was heading towards businesses having signs and not temporary <br />banners. <br />Chair Schaps stated the purpose of this was for aesthetics and to have a "clean" looking <br />property. <br />Mr. Smyser stated it was more difficult to enforce a yearly permit than it was to enforce a <br />monthly permit. He noted with a monthly permit it was easier to follow -up on it. <br />Mr. Hyden asked at what point would the banner become a permanent sign. He noted if <br />permanent posts were put in, then wouldn't that make it a sign and not a temporary <br />banner. <br />DRAFT MINUTES <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.