07/27/1970 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ I -2 10 3 e 7/27 /70 -- No comments made I d. Recommended sign district boundary changes (1 ) north and south sides East 11th extending 1/2 block west of Mill Street I (2) Valley River area, integrated neighborhood shopping (3) Hannum Motors, east of Coburg, and south of Centennial, Highway Oriented District , ! Action will be taken on these items at the regular Council meeting of July 27, 1970. Regarding Item 4d(3), Councilman Williams asked if this Highway Oriented District would be within 1 200 feet of Coburg Road or Centennial Boulevard. Planning Director explained that they were con- sidering Centennial Boulevard as a major arterial. It hasn't been all reclassified to Highway Oriented District because of the adjacent park property. Mr. McDonald moved seconded by Mr. Teague to approve Items 4a, 4b, 4c and 4d as recommended by the I Planning Commission. M0tion carried. 5. Conditional Use Permit, Appeal (Snellstrom) - Conditional Use Permit for construction e I of a child day care center at the southeast corner of University and 23rd was I approved with condition that no more than ten children (all younger than three years~ be accommodated at one time., The ten child limitation is being appealed. , A letter was read from Mr. Wayne G. Helikson, Attorney for Mrs. Snellstrom, in which he contended that this provision makes the business economically unfeasible, I and is unreasonable. She has suggested that the limitation be that no more than sixty children be present in the building in any given six-day week period, which would limit the average attendance per day to ten and add flexibility. I i Council asked for clarification of this proposal. Mayor Anderson felt it was I not clear, and that the Council should talk in terms of daily attendance or 1 weekly attendance. Planning Director requested that the Council schedule a public hearing for the first II Eegular meeting in August. Mr. McDonald moved seconded by Mrs. Beal to call a public hearing regarding request for review of conditional use (Snellstrom) for August 10, 1970. Motion carried. Mr. McDonald moved seconded by Mr. Teague to approve Item 5 of the Committee report. Motion carried. 6. Sign Code Changes - Council had requested that this item be postponed until Mr. Obie could be in attendance. It is understood hewwill return to the City by July 27. Planning Director outlined Mr. Obie's concerns, and explained Planning Commission intent when the ordinance was adopted. 0 I Mr. Spickerman, Assistant City Attorney, said this could be construed a change in substance because of the ambiguity of the language used. Mr. Obie brought this matter up when the building department would no longer issue permits to allow signs in the 15 foot setback area. Superintendent of Building said the point in dispute is a matter of enforcement, and that it was his understanding the intent of the ordinance was as he had :-, applied it - billboards were required to be set back 15 feet in the highway oriented district. Otherwise, the whole criteria of highway oriented ~igning y would have to be discarded. In answer to Councilman McDonald, Mr. Spickerman said present signs owned by Mr. Obie would be greatly affected because they would not be allowed to remain in their location after the amortization period had expired. Mrs. Hayward pointed out that the affect on Mr. Obie's business had been discussed during hearings on the sign code, and that he had been aware that his present signs would have to be. amortized. The amortization period was designated to allow him to make financial arrangements. In answer to Mrs. Beal, Superintendent of Building said 15 feet was the r minimum thought possible to prevent blanketing of adjoining signs. I I I In reply to Mr. Williams, the City Attorney said there is no legal problem involved with amortization. This was accepted by the sign industry when the code was adopted. ,\r.his'item considered under Public Hearings. See page one of these minutes. II e 7/27/70 - 11 ~!l