My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
1993_0322_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
1993
>
1993_0322_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/1/2011 8:41:56 AM
Creation date
10/18/2011 1:20:32 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
101
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
2a A motion to recommend approval of institutional off <br />remise signs as long as the number of signs per <br />institution does not exceed 2, the size of signs does <br />not exceed 4 square feet in area,.that the signs be ar <br />standard color and design approved by staff, and that <br />each sign be subject to a onb- time permit fee failed on <br />a 3 to 3 vote. Reasons for dissenting votes included <br />that the signs are not necessary. that there would be <br />. and that the signs <br />too many signs on collector streets, � <br />do not cause a problem, therefore there should be no <br />restrictionse <br />motion to recommend approval of institutional seasonal <br />banners as long as the total number of days the seasonal <br />banners are .displayed does not exceed 15 days i, faded on <br />a 3 to 3 vote a Pteasons for dissenting votes included <br />that too many days were being allowed, not enough days <br />0 <br />were being allowed# and that the signs should not be <br />regulated at alle <br />Staff Recommendation: <br />1, :It <br />is recommended that the city Council approve amendments to <br />th e s Cit ' sig n ordinance concerning wall Signage, window <br />signage, seasonal banners and institutional signs <br />Council Act ion ,g xested o <br />1. <br />motion to direct the City Attorney ' s of f ice to prepare the <br />appropriate ordinance amendments for city -Council consideration at the April 2611'.1993 meeting. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.