Laserfiche WebLink
-3- <br /> be allowed to strengthen -the sign against .strong. winds, finding <br /> that, these proposed alterationswould not seem to -be detrimental , <br /> but could enhance the property.. . Before voting, a friendly amend- <br /> ment was made by, Mr. Jones and accepted by the maker and second <br /> which further stipulates that there shall be' no air- space between <br /> the planter and the sign. <br /> The amended -motion carried. unanimously. <br /> There were five students from an* urban politics class at Bethel <br /> '-College present and the problems-.with air space. between foundations <br /> and signs were clarified for them. <br /> Mr. Lundquist offered..several suggestions during the consideration <br /> of the new sign ordinance which followed. He was. sympathetic to <br /> the Commission'.s concerns. regarding free standing signs saying he <br /> "personally doesn' t like signs but doesn't mind signage on' buildings. " <br /> He believed "even- monument signs can get gaudy" . The Commission <br /> concurred with his suggestion. that the new ordinance should be <br /> published and reaction-.from,.experts sought before. final approval. <br /> The secretary left at 10: 00 P'.M. <br /> The meeting was recessed -at 10 : 00 P.M. <br /> The meeting reconvened at 10 :.05 P.M. <br /> • The Commission continued its consideration of the proposed sign <br /> ordinance and in particular- that section dealing with free standing <br /> signs. Suggestions for change and further research. was noted by <br /> Mr. Berg. <br /> Motion by Mr. Enrooth: and seconded. by Mr. Sopcinski to adjourn. <br /> Motion carried unanimously. <br /> The meeting was. adjourned at 10 :48 P.M. <br /> Respectfully submitted, <br /> Helen Crowe <br />