My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2001 Planning Commission Packets
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2001
>
2001 Planning Commission Packets
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/29/2012 9:14:03 AM
Creation date
2/27/2012 4:13:01 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
932
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Mounds View Planning Commission <br />12eg�la� li�iee���g <br />February 7, 2001 <br />Page 2 <br />Director Ericson explained there was a table in the staff report that shows what changes <br />were made to the code. <br />Director Ericson explained staff revised the way baruier size is determzned based on a <br />20% ratio of the frontage. There is also a new definition for window signage. > , I <br />Director Ericson asked the Cozxznnission how they felt about "tKe proposed structure of the <br />ordinance or any changes made by Staff. <br />Commissianer Johnson questioned whether the real estate <br />changed to thirty-two (32) square feet. <br />Director Ericson indicated he would make the requested <br />allow a thirty-two (32) square foot real esta#e sign, <br />Director Ericson read the wall sign definition <br />should be re-worded to disallow roof signs ur <br />Chair Stevenson suggested changing <br />proposed Subd. 4b of Section 1008.0 <br />Commissioner Miller asked <br />Chair St <br />whether <br />Commissioner:`T <br />get a permit and <br />indi <br />irector Ericson expla� <br />�rmits and by default, <br />e allowed to have fre <br />ant to restrict that. :.:, � <br />on P <br />�utld�ng elevation to bu <br />� on'Page 21'; for clarity <br />the sign `code the use of <br />_ <br />ns �llowed in B 1 was <br />ge to tHe s�gn ordinance to <br />ts and suggested the section <br />.ntegral, feature of the roof. <br />lding face or side in <br />purposes. <br />pennants was covered. ;° ;� <br />here in the sign code pennants were covered ar <br />�reviously that would govern pennants. <br />under {e) if only businesses were required to <br />�mmercia�, industrial or multi-family residential would need <br />nd R-2 properties would not need a permit. Homeowners <br />of expression signs per Minnesota Statutes and Staff did not <br />aden ques#ioned whether flags on private property was an issue the <br />ssion needed to regulate. <br />Directar Ericso�i said the code could exempt governmental or national flags or any type <br />of non-conlxrkercial flags. <br />Commissioner Miller said she did not understand subpart 5(b) under window signs. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.