PL PACKET 01191988 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1 and even an apostrophe separately and not including any of the space=' • 2 ' ' around"-the letters . The sign ordinance , on the other hand, as,i 3 Councilmember Marks.- had pointed out, .had been -modeled on the type ofr 4 signage commonly used by cities to require signage be calculated. 5 according to the rectangle which encircles the copy. - The City Manager. 6 indicated he perceived there weren' t many municipalities who didn' t 7 follow the same policies. 8 He also indicated Mr. Hamer had assumed the responsibility for not 9 catching the incorrect calculations presented by the sign company and 10 issuing a permit for those calculations. 11 Previous attempts to misconstrue the City' s Sign Ordinance require- 12' ments were recalled with the following discussions: 13 Enrooth said he was amazed at how many times businesses had misread 14 the ordinance and put up non-conforming signage before getting Council 15 approval. He cited the Dairy Queen signage as an example. He 16 wondered if the ordinance wasn' t clear enough or whether staff was not 17 emphatic about what the City required. 18 Ranallo pointed to the beauty shop across from Apache and the attempts 19 by the Country Store not to count blank space in what was obviously 20 part of their sign, as other examples . 21 Childs reiterated that the wording in the City' s ordinance was pretty 22 standard throughout the region. 23 Sundland said he perceived it might not be so much a matter of 24 misinterpreting the ordinance language as it was "interpreting the 25 ordinance to say what you would like. " . 26 Marks said he suspected St. Anthony' s ordinance wasn' t much different 27 when. it came to sign language because it was based on measurements 28 commonly used by most municipalities. 29 Enrooth indicated he perceived the City had to develop some type of 30 form to show permit applicants which could not be misconstrued. 31 ' Childs responded that graph paper would not have prevented this error 32 because what the sign company had done was to draw five little 33 rectangles around different words and letters rather than around the 34 entire copy. 35 Proponents Give Their Side of Controversy 36 Mr . Farrell indicated the sign company had worked with Mr. Hamer to 37 calculate the signage and that it had been Mr . Hamer who had told him 38 the front sign would be 82 square feet. He said Mr . Hamer told him he 39 would "have to go before the Planning Commission to get a variance 40 for signage needed for one side of the pylon. " He indicated he would 8