My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_02477
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF2000 - PF2999
>
2400
>
pf_02477
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 11:53:51 AM
Creation date
12/8/2004 11:32:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
2477
Planning Files - Type
Zoning Text Amendment
Address
2660 CIVIC CENTER DR
Applicant
SIGN ORDINANCE
Status
APPROVED
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
138
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
<br />HEKORANDUK <br /> <br />DATE: <br /> <br />4 February 1993 <br /> <br />TO: <br /> <br />Planning Commission <br /> <br />FROM: <br /> <br />John Shardlow <br /> <br />RE: <br /> <br />Update sign Ordinance Issues <br /> <br />BACKGROUND: <br /> <br />New ordinance standards have been adopted governing: contractor <br />signs, roof signs, real estate signs, political signs, window <br />signs, directional signs, and commercial and industrial signage. <br />There are also some sign issues that have been reviewed. and <br />recommended by the Planning Commission generally, but, which have <br />not yet been formally recommended to the City Council in ordinance <br />language. <br /> <br />There are also some sign issues that have been discussed at length, <br />but, final action was delayed pending review and direction from the <br />city Council. These issues were reviewed with the Council at a <br />workshop meeting on January 19 and we have some direction to review <br />with the Planning commission. <br /> <br />REVIEW OF ISSUBS ALREADY REVIEWED BY PLANNING COKKISSION, BUT NOT <br />YBT FORKALLY RBCOKKBNDBD IN ORDINANCB LANGUAGB <br /> <br />There are two sign issues that.the Planning Commission previously <br />reviewed and generally recommended to the city Council. These <br />included wall signage for multi-tenant buildings that do not front <br />on a public street, and the handling of window signage in buildings <br />in which the principal exterior building material is glass. <br /> <br />In the case of interior tenant spaces, the recommendation was to <br />allow wall signage not to exceed 1/2 the area allowed for the same <br />building if it were fronting on a public street. For window signs <br />in buildings which are predominantly glass, the suggested standard <br />was again suggested as not to exceed 1/2 the allowed area of wall <br />signage. The City Council reviewed both of these recommendations <br />and agreed with them. suggested language is as follows: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.