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 Vzew Planning Commission <br />12egut�r I�✓ieeting <br />February 7, 2001 <br />Page 5 <br />The Planning Commission decided to discuss flashing signs at the next meeting. <br />Chair Stevenson indicated that according to the definition of flashing signs fhe City lias <br />flashing signs within the City. <br />Dit•ector Ericson said the Mermaid sign has the capability <br />flashing. The City Hall sign does flash. <br />Director Ericson explained he had tal�en out all language ori <br />seven criteria, as he did not feel it was necessary io have the <br />Chair Stevenson noted most non-complying signs are <br />Director Ericson indicated the changes being proposed <br />of the signs into compliance. Any sign not allawed �iy' <br />allowed to continue until destroyed by an act of nature <br />more. <br />Director Ericson indicated the �niscellaneous signage rf <br />drafted section and inquired as to whether the Planning <br />with the language. He indicated he did noi believe this <br />make any of the covered esiablzsliments non complyin� <br />The F <br />Staff. <br />Director <br />the City. <br />5 '' Iteviev✓ <br />his <br />it was <br />�ylaws <br />1 but he has not seen <br />25 "spelling out the <br />�uaee in :that section. <br />�ated in R4 ar�d RS;�istricts. <br />� the. ardinance would 3iring 9d% <br />hanges to the ordinance would be <br />� cliai�ged by more than 50% or <br />�uireinents on Page 23 is a newiy <br />�omrriission was comfortable <br />rew provision of the code would <br />with the language as drafted by <br />a slide show of various signs tluoughout <br />�r Ericson explained the bylaws of the Commission require that the Commission <br />the bylaws during the first meeting in February. The Iast revision was last year <br />re were only riiinor changes made. Council eliminated the council liaison <br />is>;and that' is referenced in fhe bylaws so Staff suggests the Ianguage be changed <br />to make''it more generic to allow for appointing oi a liaison at Council discretion. <br />Commissioner Miller asked if special meetings and ernergency special meetings could be <br />separated to clean up the language. <br />The Commission pointed out a few typographical errors in the bylaws and aslced that they <br />be cleaned up. <br />i <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.