06-16-1992 PC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . which cases should be handled administratively and which ones should be handled through the CUP process how many signs should be allowed the size of the signs the location of businesses in order to qualify for signage a def in i t ion of businesses that at~e it t~LH~al in nature" where should the signs be allowed a definition of J1dit~ectionalil signage a definition of ~off-the beaten path" for busineses to qualify. The Commission agreed to ask the staff to propose some ideas on these subjects so that this discussion could be continued at the public hearing and meeting on June 23, 1992. Chairman Nadeau joined the meeting at 7:43 p.m. The Commission also asked staff to check some of the surrounding rural townships in Sherburne and Anoka Counties to see if they have any ot~dinances that would be helpful on this subject. Commissioner Johnson also noted that there may be some policies in other sign ordinances that could or should be incorporated into this ordinance. Commissioner Nadeau indicated that he-would attempt to move this subject to the beginning of the agenda for the next meeting. I \!.Jindnw Sign<=; The staff memo of June 12, 1992 was again reviewed, and it was noted that there was a great deal of variety in the ordinances of other communities, ranging from no regulation to allowing no more than 25% of window coverage. In discussing the purpose of any regulation, it was agreed that the main reason for any regulation was esthetics and pet~haps safety. In a straw vote on this subject, 2 Commission members were in favor of no regulation, and three members would agree to allowing up to 50% window coverage ~or signs. The definition of a window sign should not include such messages as Christmas greetings or supporting the local teams. It was