My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08/31/1970 Meeting
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Minutes
>
Historic Minutes
>
1970
>
08/31/1970 Meeting
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/24/2007 12:12:37 AM
Creation date
11/2/2006 4:05:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Minutes
Meeting_Type
Meeting
CMO_Meeting_Date
8/31/1970
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
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).
View images
View plain text
<br /> "... I <br /> ~3 <br /> e <br /> 8/31/70 <br /> r " , <br /> I <br /> he was sure Mr. Obie would have been heard from sooner. I <br /> Mr. Mohr was concerned with the question of regulation, and that perhaps this <br /> was going beyond regulation and taking Mr. Obie's property. Was the impact on <br /> these signs discussed at previous hearings? <br /> I City Attorney said he recalled the remark made previously by Mr. Hoffman very <br /> clearly and that the Planning Commission 'did reach a compromise between an <br /> objective of abolition of outdoor advertising signs in the city and the present <br /> provisions contained in the sign ordinance. What the Council is really consider- <br /> I ing is what its policy is in regard to the sign ordinance. The City A~torney's- <br /> r office has interpreted the ordinance to say there will be no billboards within <br /> the 15' setback, and the Council decision is whether they want to change this <br /> I, intent. The City is not actually taking anything from Mr. Obie at this time, <br /> II but would be preventing him from installing something because of provisions in <br /> I the sign ordinance. As far as consideration given at time of adoption of the <br /> ordinance, the Council received a great many statistics as to implications of e <br /> the ordinance on the outdoor advertising industry. <br /> II Mrs. Niven pointed out that others besides those in outdoor advertising were <br /> affected by the setback provisions of the ordinance. Those installing signs <br /> since adoption of the ordinance have accepted these provisions with the idea <br /> II they would be uniform and would be required of everyone within five years. An <br /> 11 amortization period was set up to mitigate some loss business people would I <br /> be faced with. A great deal of thought and consideration were given before <br /> II the ordinance was adopted. <br /> I, <br /> I" Mr. Hoffman felt the overall effect on the outdoor industry was considered, <br /> II but that there apparently was a misunderstanding as to setback on which the <br /> figures were based. Mr. Pearson said there were volumes of statistics given <br /> I about billboards, and they were generally spoken of in terms of area, and <br /> I this was the conception under which the Planning Commission included them. The <br /> ".... -.~6~fu"n:L:l,i>#on,:_considered',the fact that leases for billboards rarely went beyond <br /> I fi ve years --time, and 10% of the billboards came down every year. He did not <br /> believe that at any time the Planning Commission considered that this 15' <br /> I setback would not apply to billboards. <br /> I Brian Obie said hjs company had believed this issue was resolved. He read <br /> I <br /> minutes of April, 1968, which he felt demonstrated this point, and said that <br /> rather than 1/3 of their billboards, which they originally thought they would <br /> ! lose, under this ruling they would lose 2/3. <br /> , <br /> ,I <br /> I Councilwoman fuyward said she believed the abie Sign Company was a good citizen <br /> 1 <br /> I and would certainly move signs they felt were blanketing others, but that the <br /> i city could not write an ordinance around a particular business. Certainly, <br /> II insurance is needed that identity signs will not be blanketed. <br /> - - <br /> II Councilwoman Beal questioned if what the Council was considering was an amendment I <br /> as, to policy, and hardship could be considered at another time. <br /> I Mrs'. Niven suggested that some arrangement could be made for the advertising <br /> I company to obtain releases from adjoining property owners that they had no <br /> objection to location of the billboards. This could cause difficulty when the <br /> I property changed hands, and also could pose problems with other types of signs~ <br /> It could also create a situation where the identity sign meant nothing. It <br /> I would be difficult to draw the line and be consistent in treatment of people <br /> using. that space. - <br /> I -.;::, <br /> City Manager suggested that the abie Company might be concerned only with the <br /> I 62 signs now affected. He asked Mr. abie if they could live with the 15' <br /> setback with regard to future signs. <br /> il <br /> II Mr. abie said his immediate concern was with the signs they now have. From <br /> II a compromise standpoint they could continue to operate if they could save the <br /> I signs they now have, and set the new ones back 15'. He pointed out that they <br /> I generally lease property not being used for another business, and there would <br /> I be no need for an identity sign. He suggested that any variances be on the <br /> II basis of complaint, and possibly referral to the sign board of appeals. <br /> Ii <br /> II Mrs. Beal asked if the real purpose of the ordinance was not beautification <br /> II of the community and avoidance of proliferation. Mrs. Niven ~eplied that this <br /> was a natural outcome, but the main purpose of the ordinance was to make it \' I <br /> I' <br /> .1 seen. The major problem was one of identity. <br /> II <br /> 1\ Manager suggested that a decision should be made concerning the desirability <br /> I of the 15 I setback. Then perhaps the question of the 62 billboards could be <br /> i considered. <br /> I <br /> I --'-~ " _.,~._.-.._- <br /> I Planning Director cautioned that there would be many problems when theaJn0rtii~ti0i1' '. <br /> I' <br /> \1 period expired, and that this should be kept in mind wnen any decist"orIs ~were -~. -. '<,. <br /> i\ made concerning billboards now locatedwithin the city. e <br /> 'I <br /> !i <br /> " i/ <br /> ! 8/31/70 - 9 <br /> ~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.