My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-07-2001
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2001
>
02-07-2001
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/28/2018 7:36:04 AM
Creation date
8/28/2018 7:36:01 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Minutes
GOVBOARD
Planning Commission
DOCTYPE
minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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 February 7, 2001 <br />Regular Meeting Page 2 <br />______________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br /> <br />Director Ericson explained staff revised the way banner size is determined based on a 20% ratio <br />of the frontage. There is also a new definition for window signage. <br /> <br />Director Ericson asked the Commission how they felt about the proposed structure of the <br />ordinance or any changes made by Staff. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson questioned whether the real estate signs allowed in B1 was changed to <br />thirty-two (32) square feet. <br /> <br />Director Ericson indicated he would make the requested change to the sign ordinance to allow a <br />thirty-two (32) square foot real estate sign. <br /> <br />Director Ericson read the wall sign definition and requirements and suggested the section should <br />be re-worded to disallow roof signs unless built as an integral feature of the roof. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson suggested changing building elevation to building face or side in proposed <br />Subd. 4b of Section 1008.09 on Page 21, for clarity purposes. <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller asked where in the sign code the use of pennants was covered. <br /> <br />Director Ericson indicated it is not but could be. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson asked Staff to research where in the sign code pennants were covered or <br />whether there was something in the code previously that would govern pennants. <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller asked if on Page 21 under (e) if only businesses were required to get a <br />permit and not residential. <br /> <br />Director Ericson explained commercial, industrial or multi-family residential would need permits <br />and by default, R-1 and R-2 properties would not need a permit. Homeowners are allowed to <br />have freedom of expression signs per Minnesota Statutes and Staff did not want to restrict that. <br /> <br />Commissioner Kaden questioned whether flags on private property was an issue the Planning <br />Commission needed to regulate. <br /> <br />Director Ericson said the code could exempt governmental or national flags or any type of non- <br />commercial flags. <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller said she did not understand subpart 5(b) under window signs. <br /> <br />Director Ericson explained the point was meant to be if there is a ground to ceiling window the <br />business would be allowed to have signage no further than four feet off the ground. If a business <br />has a window four (4) feet high and three (3) feet off the ground for a total of seven (7) feet off <br />the ground then the business would be allowed one (1) foot of signage area. The key is to
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.