My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes 2010 06 21 APPROVED
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
>
2005-2019 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
2010 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Historic Preservation Commission Minutes 2010 06 21 APPROVED
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 3:08:24 PM
Creation date
9/10/2010 8:37:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
HPCMIN 2010 06 21 APPROVED
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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
Historic Preservation Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />June 21, 2010 <br />Page 6 of 8 <br /> <br />Williams questioned if there were any allowances for alley signs. <br />Russ answered maybe blade signs but no wall signs. <br />Poppitz recommended the allowance of alleys signs. <br />Williams asked if there would be a maximum number of wall signs permitted, say <br />for buildings with multiple tenants. <br />McMillan answered a building could have as many wall signs as the area <br />permits. <br />Muckle stated there should be incentives established if the historical sign is <br />retained. <br />Stewart recommended there should be a waiver permitted to allow for a larger <br />sign if the historic building is preserved. <br />Projecting Sign discussion – no comments <br />Marquee Sign discussion <br />Lewis asked if staff had considered making a consistent maximum height for <br />every sign type. <br />McMillan stated staff would create a supplemental drawing to show how the <br />maximum heights vary. <br />Freestanding Sign discussion – no comments <br />Awning Sign Discussion <br />Koertje reminded staff that awnings should not obscure the architectural; integrity <br />of the building. <br />Lewis recommended a maintenance provision to make sure tattered awnings <br />would be repaired. <br />Window/Sandwich Board/Menu Box Sign discussion – no comment <br />Kiosk Sign discussion <br />Commissioners worried the kiosks would look sloppy, like the kiosk in Pearl <br />Street Mall (Boulder). <br />Landmark Sign discussion <br />Muckle stated the process for landmarking a sign should be as easy as possible. <br />She also stated incentives should be provided if they landmark the historic sign. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.