My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-20-1995
Clerk
>
Minutes
>
CITY COUNCIL
>
1952-1999
>
1995
>
03-20-1995
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/26/2012 2:04:24 PM
Creation date
5/12/2003 11:49:17 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Minutes
Date
3/20/1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
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).
View images
View plain text
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW <br /> <br />Planning Manager Ken Adams explained the Planning Division took a holistic approach to project <br />review and noted that while a project might meet all planning conditions, the project might not be <br />architecturally aesthetic. Uptegraff explained this approach differed from most jurisdictions which <br />conduct review of architectural components only for public facilities. <br /> <br />Councilmembers discussed the economics of architectural review and suggested that architectural <br />aspects of a project be brought to the attention of the Planning Commission early in the review <br />process and that a book of examples of aesthetically pleasing projects be prepared to assist <br />applicants with architectural design. <br /> <br />SIGN REGULATIONS <br /> <br />Associate Planner Vince Fregoso explained the Planning Division's philosophy regarding <br />commercial signs, indicating that in general signs were to enhance both a structure and the <br />surrounding area, and that their content was to be limited to name and advertising of the business. <br />He presented numerous slides illustrating good and poor signage, noting signs which were <br />"clean," concise and readable improved the overall appearance of a building or project. <br /> <br />Following review of numerous cases involving pole, monument, wall-mounted and mobile signs, <br />Councilmembers and staff agreed the following would be addressed in the next sequence of <br />ordinance changes for planning issues: <br /> <br />- flags, pennants, and balloons would be prohibited; <br /> <br />- more flexible standards would be developed for issuance of <br /> sign permits to existing buildings where landscaped setbacks <br /> cannot be altered; and <br /> <br />- an abatement process such as is used for elimination of public <br /> nuisances would be investigated for application to nonconforming <br /> signs. <br /> <br />Adams commented that Sign Code enforcement was labor intensive; Uptegraffindicated staff was <br />developing a pilot program to use volunteers in this area. <br /> <br />Mayor Pro Tern Richardson suggested Councilmembers review gas station identification signs as <br />they drive around the City to provide feedback to staff regarding the number that should be <br />permitted on a site. <br /> <br />CITY COUNCIL MINUTES <br /> <br />75 MARCH 20, 1995 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.