My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2019 05 09
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2000-2019 Planning Commission
>
2019 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2019 05 09
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 9:55:12 AM
Creation date
5/16/2019 2:01:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
PCPKT 2019 05 19
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
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
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />April 11, 2019 <br />Page 6 of 10 <br />Commercial areas <br />Ritchie encouraged the commissioners to continue thinking about signs they liked and <br />didn't like in the area and let staff know over the next few weeks. <br />Moline asked if it would be possible to know how many signs would be made non- <br />conforming by these updates. <br />Ritchie replied that it would be very difficult to evaluate all the signs, but anything <br />existing would be grandfathered in and staff anticipated that more signs would be <br />conforming than non -conforming based on these changes. <br />Downtown <br />Brauneis asked for examples of current freestanding signs in Louisville currently. <br />Zuccaro listed Moxie, the Underground, and the gas station. He explained that <br />freestanding signs might be appropriate for businesses that don't come up to the front <br />property line. He noted that allowing freestanding signs in any case might allow <br />buildings with setbacks of a few feet to add freestanding signs in front of their wall signs. <br />Rice suggested language offering that applicants could have either a wall sign or a <br />freestanding sign. <br />Temporary signs <br />Rice noted that in commercial buildings that don't fill up, signs for rent or sale are <br />effectively permanent. While he did not like the signs usually, their utility was <br />indisputable. <br />Moline asked about the permit process. <br />Ritchie responded that staff would have to make sure that the permit section was not <br />regulating print on temporary signs. <br />Zuccaro noted that staff had considered regulating changes of copy, especially <br />situations with illumination changes. That would not affect the code, but would probably <br />occur over the counter. <br />Moline observed that there were a lot of regulations related to illumination. <br />Richtie replied that those regulations attended to impact on neighbors and dark sky <br />impacts. <br />BRaD Requests <br />Ritchie informed the Commission of the feedback from the BRaD discussion: <br />• Consider teardrop banners for Grand Openings <br />• Murals outside of Downtown and remove % restrictions <br />• Support sandwich boards outside of downtown <br />• Concern about allowing alley fronting businesses a sandwich board anywhere <br />within the block <br />• Allow Electronic Message Centers <br />8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.