Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Chairperson Nixt stated he would consider dealing with this in phases. <br /> <br />Mr. Bill Salter, 5919 177th Lane, stated his biggest concern with this is they adopt a lot of <br />regulations in the City and he wondered where the funding is to regulate this. He wondered if <br />this is really needed. He stated they have so many rules and regulations already. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hunt stated his concern is that any time they have a regulation and enforce it such <br />as the permits, it will start to take up employee time and City money and pretty soon the City will <br />start looking for reimbursement and it will go back to a fee basis. <br /> <br />Associate Planner DaInes stated the original intent it to not have any permits for any non- <br />commercial sign in residential districts. She reiterated that it is all up to the Commission <br />regarding how much or how little regulation they want to have. <br /> <br />Commissioner Brauer stated in looking at points 9.12.13 he thought they should cross out items <br />C and D because he did not understand the reasoning. <br /> <br />Commissioner Van Scoy stated he found this confusing also because it seemed to be a little in <br />contradiction to residential areas. <br /> <br />Associate Planner DaInes stated that was before they allowed off premise signs. If they allow off <br />premise signs that was part of the stipulation that a permit would be involved. <br /> <br />Commissioner Van Scoy asked if that statement is incorporated in what is presented to them. <br /> <br />Associate Planner DaInes stated based on if it is a non-commercial speech sign it is. <br /> <br />Mr. Dennis Carpenter, BOB 106 radio, and Mr. Daniel Peters, stated Ms. Frolik sent them the <br />current sign ordinance. He stated they wanted to ask staff what the problem is that is trying to be <br />corrected with signs in the City. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt reviewed the reason for the Code changes. <br /> <br />Associate Planner DaInes stated the goal is to take out all of the regulations based on content. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt stated if their concern is regulating temporary signage, he got the impression <br />that people are not overly concerned about the flexibility of residents to erect temporary signage <br />lawfully, not in the public right-of-way. So if they are going to regulate temporary signs, it <br />should not be content based and be done in a manner for the greatest flexibility to the residents; <br />but he wondered why they would need six weeks because it seemed overly long for a sign to be <br />displayed. <br /> <br />Associate Planner DaInes indicated the six weeks was already in the ordinance and she tried not <br />to remove too much. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/September 6, 2007 <br />Page 8 of 15 <br />