My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5/7/1986
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1986
>
5/7/1986
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:53:01 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 12:24:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
05/07/1986
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
98
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
Director Keating did not think this ordinance itself will <br />prohibit someone putting up an ugly sign; it will just keep the <br />sign from being too big and in the wrong place. Generally the <br />proposed ordinance puts restrictions on the size, number and <br />location of signs. <br />Planner Challacombe then discussed the three basic types of <br />signs - facade, canopy and free standing - and the tables <br />developed for calculating the signage area. A facade, for <br />instance, is calculated based on the area of the wall and the <br />percentage allowed for the sign. <br />Commissioner Wodtke inquired about a marquis sign, and <br />Planner Challacombe stated it would be allowed as long as it is <br />not part of the roofline. <br />Commissioner Bird wished to know how our ordinance compares <br />with that of the City of Vero Beach, and Planner Challacombe <br />stated that it is very similar; in fact, facade calculations are <br />exactly the same. <br />Director Keating believed we are on strong ground re sizes <br />of signs; the representatives of sign companies who attended the <br />workshops felt what is proposed is fair and consistent. <br />Planner Challacombe felt possibly the most controversial <br />discussion was in relation to off -premises signage, i.e., <br />billboards. No one liked the existing ordinance. Staff worked <br />out a compromise solution for off premises directional signage so <br />that it now is based on the same variables as any free standing <br />sign - amount of traffic, size of roadway, etc. <br />Commissioner Bird asked how this compares with the present <br />ordinance, and Planner Challacombe stated it would allow these <br />signs in the General Commercial, Heavy Commercial, Light <br />Industrial and General Industrial Districts as opposed to just <br />one industrial district, but it reduces sizes and requires more <br />spacing between the signs. <br />Commissioner Bird inquired what we do to encourage someone <br />to go with an attractive routed type sign versus just a hand <br />39 <br />MAY 7 1986 Boa 64 pm,JE325 <br />L_ I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.