My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-06-1996
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1996
>
11-06-1996
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/31/2018 3:22:02 PM
Creation date
7/31/2018 2:29:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV City Council
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
11/6/1996
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
107
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 November 6, 1996 <br /> Regular Meeting Page 14 <br /> versus monument signage. Mr. Edward Paster <br /> replied that usually the tenant wants an <br /> identification sign that separates them from <br /> everyone else and that monument signage may .,, <br /> not always be accepted as the desired signage <br /> for'their site. He also indicated that promoting 4.4. ..aiiiimaiiilion.. <br /> the name of the tenants seems to now be the Amu, <br /> trend. He thinks that if we have the monument <br /> sign near the area where the and and the <br /> p <br /> proposed bridgee will be located, as Staff as <br /> indicated, it would be innovative and a 11.1111111L. <br /> somewhat different approach. He added that it <br /> maytake some convincingthe restaurant that it .::`''"'t `illlll`i`ll'`lh <br /> would be adequate, but he would make a real <br /> hard sell for goingto the monument sign wit . <br /> thetenant's name on it and eliminatingthe < < <<> '«< <br /> ><::>, <br /> i , <br /> pylon sign for the tenant. He a er ll » k <br /> s <br /> ' INIMMIS <br /> the concept wuld work but may be `re ry hard <br /> sell. <br /> „AN .,,,i,iiiiiii, .:igi • <br /> Chair Peterson inquired if the; 'anning . <br /> Commission had everything they neededtta.i <br /> mi - <br /> give this case further cane `ation. Dfet ii<r <br /> Sheldon et' :;time i :: di '#khat she sheil6are <br /> from the tAgg t.a diagram dianfithgtshows the <br /> locations w &e they wantifit§Igagge and also <br /> a drawing of the thggtOttOge itself to what the <br /> package i§. 0:10 tiog*imoilktbe variance. She <br /> suggested en thatitalkEtAnning <br /> Comm sion is in agr p that shopping <br /> centers need to be looed' t again in terms of <br /> hopg signage is handled, especially centers this <br /> large:, a provision cat�be worked on that would <br /> atlow for sign packages. She indicated that <br /> gold!.>.comiack with the proposal for the <br /> centerdorgitigtgdiption signs which the applicant <br /> feels ' t&r ceded because of the bridge and <br /> can then get working on the overall signage. <br /> Commissioner Stevenson suggested that the <br /> Commission explore what the signage is of • <br /> other similar centers along Highway 10, such <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.