My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-28-2005 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2005
>
02-28-2005 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/11/2023 10:51:41 AM
Creation date
1/11/2023 10:25:30 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
422
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
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO C:iTY t'Ol NCIL MEETING <br />Monday, February 14,2005 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />(#05-3072 Oronu SchiHils, Continued) <br />Staff recommends approval of the ItKation and design of the proposed monument sign as it will replace <br />the old and outdated existing sign and should result in a reduction or elimination of the temporar) signs <br />placed on this comer periodically. Curtis noted currently there are no standards within the City’s zoning <br />code to address institutional signs. The zoning code ahso does not address whether a sponsor panel is <br />appropriate for signage ser\ ing an institutional use such as a sch«M)l. Staff would suggest possibly <br />eliminating corporate logos from the .sponsor panel or perhaps limiiing ihc style of letters to match those <br />used overall on the monument to minimize the eommerciul feel of the sponsor panel. <br />Sansevere indicated he was m attendance at the Planning Commission meeting when this item was <br />discussed and does not have an issue with the sponsor panel. Sansevere suggested the school consider <br />rotating the name of the sponsor periodically as a means of raising donations. <br />Murphy commented he does not have an issue with the monument sign but that the Council should <br />discuss the possible precedence of the sponsor panel. <br />Neal Law son thanked Staff for their help on this application. Lawson noted they arc attempting to <br />construct this sign without public funds, w hich is the reason for the sponsor panel. <br />White noted the sponsor panel is the lowest panel on the monument sign. White indicated he likes the <br />design of tlic proposed sign. <br />Peterson inquired whether the banners hanging on the fence next to the tennis courts would be remo\ed if <br />this new sign is constructed. <br />Lawson indicated they arc hopeful those would be removed. <br />McMillan slated she likes the updated sign and location of the sign. McMillan noted Staff did suggest <br />that the sponsor panel not have a corporate logo on it and that the same font be utilized. McMillan <br />indicated she is in favor of those recommendations since it w ould help dimmish the possibility that this <br />sponsor panel be used as a billboard. McMillan inquired visually how the sponsor panel would look. <br />Lawson stated they have not given much consideration at this jxiiiit to what the sponsor panel would look <br />like and that various sign companies are recommending this t>i)c of sign. <br />Sansevere inquired whether information was able to be obtained on whether other schools have similar <br />type signs. <br />Law.son stated a number of these electronic signs have been constructed as part of the construction of a <br />new school building and were covered under that bonding. Law.son indicated the schools with manual <br />signs are in the priKess of changing to electronic signs and that they are mcluding a .sponsor panel <br />Lawson stated Hopkins, F.dcn I’rainc, and Wayzata High School have lit electronic sponsor panels. <br />pac ;e 8
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.