|
<br /> ,.....
<br /> 731 e
<br /> 11/1/71
<br /> '1 Ii
<br /> I Q. II I
<br /> Amendment, Billboard Size Regulations ~ Obie Outdoor Advertising has requested an II
<br /> I' lO/l3/71 amendment to a section of the Sign Code to increase area limitations for billboards
<br /> II from 650 square feet to 672 square, feet to accommodate signs used by that company I;
<br /> ,I
<br /> i in rotation to various areas. Planning COrrmllssion discussed this matter, and in
<br /> I!
<br /> ,I minutes of that meeting have been circulated to Councilmen. The ,Planning COrrmllssion
<br /> I: recommendation was that the Council not change the area allowed for billboards.
<br /> I'
<br /> ;1
<br /> I'
<br /> " representati ve of ObLe Outdoor Advertising,
<br /> I: Mr. George Haines, explained that his
<br /> ,I company now has four billboards which are in excess of the allowable area. He
<br /> II explained that they have branches in other cities and states which allow the larger
<br /> Ii si gns , and that it is a hardship if they have to be remade for use in this city. .
<br /> I: .....
<br /> I In answer to Councilman Williams, Mr. Haines said that the signs are made locally,
<br /> ,I but that they. are made for use in other areas,.as well as this city.
<br /> ,I
<br /> I;
<br /> "
<br /> "
<br /> I: Councilmen questioned Mr. Haines further about general size of signs and reasons
<br /> I for the request. In answer to some council concerns, Planning Director explained e
<br /> II
<br /> I, that the Sign Code was not intended to recotnize national standards, but to set
<br /> :1 standards for our city. At the time of adoption, an additional 50 square feet was
<br /> I:
<br /> " added to this section to allow for cut-outs, and it was never the intent to allow
<br /> I ~
<br /> 1; a larger sign.
<br /> ,I
<br /> I' Mayor Anderson pointed out that this was an indication of the type request the Council
<br /> II
<br /> I, would be faced with when the arrortizat,ion period begins to expire for some signs ,
<br /> I, I
<br /> Ii I
<br /> " affected by the Code. He suggested the Council and Planning COrrmllssion meet jointly
<br /> I'
<br /> , to discuss the Sign Ordinance. He pointed out that several: members of the Council
<br /> H
<br /> , were not present at the time of hearings and adoption, and coul d probably benefi t
<br /> i'
<br /> , from such an educational process. ,
<br /> I' ,
<br /> 'I
<br /> II City Manager agreed. that this could be beneficial, but pointed out that it should be
<br /> I,
<br /> II
<br /> 'I understood that this would not be reconsi derati on of the ordinance. Many signs have '[
<br /> "
<br /> "
<br /> :1 been installed under the limitations of the new code. Mayor Anderson agreed that this i
<br /> il
<br /> Ii should merely be an orientation session, and not a rehearing of the existing ordinance. II
<br /> " He felt the Council should meet with the Planning Comnrrssion to be better informed
<br /> i I'
<br /> "
<br /> I' before making judgments on the exceptions that will be requested of them. i
<br /> Ii "
<br /> "
<br /> 11
<br /> I: Williams moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that this matter be placed on file. Motion
<br /> ,Mr.
<br /> carried.
<br /> City Manager suggested that it might be helpful to make an analysis of the kinds of
<br /> appea~s which had come before the Sign Code Board of Appeals, and whether there were
<br /> tli some obvious problems. - -- File
<br /> i;
<br /> R. L-COG Restructuring - Mayor Anderson commented that L-COG is in the process of :1
<br /> 10/20/71 restructuring, and that a proposed restructuring document has been received. He ,
<br /> assured Council that he would refer the revised document to them for final approval
<br /> and s ugges ti ons for change.
<br /> i ~ Councilman McDonald commented that the Mayor was the Council representative to L-COG, I
<br /> I: and that this appeared to be a proper recommendation. :1
<br /> I Councilman Gribskov felt that, since a public hearing would ultimately be held, ,I
<br /> ,I
<br /> I: this was certainly a good procedure. File
<br /> I'
<br /> II
<br /> ; ~ Verification of 1971-72 Tax Rate - During the budget process,
<br /> " S. an attempt was made "
<br /> "
<br /> ii lO/20/71 to develop a budget which would result in an $8.67 per thousand tax rate. Act ual ; ~ e
<br /> 1: rate came to $8.68 per thousand, which is a little higher than anticipated. File ,
<br /> ,I :!
<br /> i;
<br /> 'I
<br /> \1 T. ,Detoxification Center S~atus - One of the elements of the Mayor's COrrmllttee on the
<br /> Ii 10/20/71 Criminal Code involved a recommendation to discontinue the practice of jailing
<br /> :1 alcoholics and substitution of a detoxification center. Manager read a report
<br /> I;
<br /> Ii from the Chief of Police on the .status of the program, and will keep the Council
<br /> i: posted on further developments. File
<br /> II u. Report on Collective Bargaining with Local 1724A of AFSCME - A memorandum was
<br /> 'I
<br /> )llO/20/71 previously distributed to Councilmen outlining action between city staff and Local
<br /> I
<br /> il l724A AFSCME relating to collective bargaining since passage of the charter amend-
<br /> " ment regarding co11ecti ve bargaining., "
<br /> II "
<br /> ,I
<br /> II
<br /> ~ \ Manager explained that it had appeared it ,would be necessary to request C<:)unci1
<br /> i'
<br /> approval to file a request for in~uncture against the arbi trators. Since distrit:.
<br /> bution of the memorandum, a meeting was held at the PERB between representatives of I
<br /> ci ty staff and AFSCME which resulted in postponement of the request for proceeding
<br /> with a representation election among city employes. Therefore, no discussion of
<br /> the memo is necessary at this time. File -
<br /> V. ,Mass Transit District, Progress Report - Councilman Mohr asked for a report from the
<br /> lO/27/71 Mass Transit District on the status of its funding proposal, federal funding and
<br /> I, other concerns.
<br /> !
<br /> Ii
<br /> I' e
<br /> I,', Mayor Anderson said this had been discussed at the last L-COG meeting, and that
<br /> federal funding has not been forthcoming.
<br /> ~ l1/l/71 - l2
<br />
|