My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06 - Planning and Zoning Monthly Report
Laserfiche
>
City Council (Permanent)
>
Agenda Packets (Permanent)
>
2012
>
07-03-2012 Council Meeting
>
06 - Planning and Zoning Monthly Report
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/7/2014 5:09:42 PM
Creation date
12/18/2013 3:46:34 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
� <br />�. <br />� <br />Mr. Adams stated that it was not the Planning Commission's intent to expand digital <br />signage to other businesses; no other uses. Mr. Habein concurred. <br />When asked by Chairman Pederson if the Planning Commission should reopen the <br />discussion on digital signs, the straw-vote of the Commission Members present was: four <br />— no; one — yes. Staff was directed to send a note to the City Council that digital signs <br />were discussed at length and to formally respond to Mr. Linnell. <br />Chairtnan Pederson reminded the Planning Commission that the City Council directed <br />them to make a recommendation to change the sign ordinance or t. Mayor Adams <br />stated that 4' X 8' signs along County Road 107 will not go ov e well. Mr. Snyder <br />stated that signs that large would be acceptable along Coun ds 16 and 11, but not <br />107. <br />Mr. Habein suggested sending the recommended c ir� blue to ity Council. A <br />public hearing needs to be held on an ordinance endment. � <br />Ms. Brown stated that the only issue seems to be� <br />zone; we haven't had a lot of input from business <br />We have not seen much commentary <br />ordinance isn't that bad, it's working. <br />much outcry, it's not working too badly. <br />Mr. Marohn stated � <br />there is no fee, no� <br />Commission voteS°� <br />decision to the City <br />are <br />A moti as ma om 1� <br />to th Council to the <br />me be ted "aye". n <br />:f.� <br />in the Ru Residential <br />sidents; the sign <br />o both; there is not <br />all? <br />onditiona se Permi riteria for a Sign Concept Plan; <br />out, etc. It not a lengthy process. The Planning <br />; applicant c peal the Planning Commission's <br />seconded by Bill Habein, to send a recommendation <br />inance that is currently in force as is. All <br />Staff was dir to send tter from Chairman Pederson to the City Council explaining <br />the decision on 'gn inance. <br />Staff was directed to nd a formal letter to Superintendent Linnell and the Chamber <br />regarding digital signs and to explain the CUP process for a Sign Concept Plan. <br />Grow Zone Expansion: <br />Mr. Marohn pointed out the one-page code contained in the packets. This area would <br />include CSAH 11, park aspects, and downtown expansion. The Grow Zone and <br />downtown could be simplified down to a few pages. We've been getting bogged down <br />with Comp Plan discussion that it requires more regulation; this is the opposite. We need <br />to simplify codes, etc. A one-page code wouldn't woflc outside of town, but it could be <br />simplified though. <br />MINUTES <br />Pequot Lakes Planning Commission <br />June 21, 2012 <br />� <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.