10/07/1974 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.":l~~J'\..."..' ':' _-__ '... _, ", _ _., .. .'" __ ___'_ 'ST(jn'.C6de 'Ame.nCiineilt's, Obie Ou'i:door. Advertisi~g.' -:....-Planni~~. Commi.ssion"recommended C. idenial of Obie's request for Sign Code amendments to Section 8.700(e) involving' :maximum surface area of billboards, and Section 8.700(h) involving separation of . . signs. i Mrs. Campbell moved seconded by Mrs. Beal to approve the Planning i , Commission recommendation for denial of the requested amendments. : ~Councilman Keller said he was in favor of this motion. However, he noted his i \affirmative vote in sending this request to the Commission for review, saying , I ;he saw no harm at any time in affording the opportunity for review of Code ! .. :provisions which citizens felt should be changed. He thought 'that was the way I igovernment should operate. i i Upon inquiry, the Mayor ruled the item would be on the October 7 consent I / calendar rather than in the public hearing section and could be segregated I for discussion if Obie people wished to comment at that time. / i ., . Comm ~ Vote was taken on the mot~on as stated. .Mot~on. car:r~ed, all. C~unc~l 110/2/74 i members present voting aye, except Counc~lman W~ll~ams absta~n~ng. I B 1 . : ' See e ow '-:"';'\_~' ....,.... Jim Torrey, 2385 Norwood, representing Obie Outdoor Advertising Co., asked to explain the importance of the' two amendments to Obie's company and the small effect that the two amendments would have on the sign code. He stated the ordinance was passed over . six years ago, and, in his opinion, any time an ordinance is six years old there are bound to be items due for a change. · In this particular case, the amendments would help the company do business more efficiently in Eugene and would do nothing to lessen the scope of the ordinance now existing. Regarding the amendment that the sign code allow having signs that are 672 square feet in size, an increase from the 650 square feet presently allowed, Mr. Torrey passed out information in support of the increase. The reason an increase is being requested is that the plywood sections that go into the sign are built to specifications 4 feet wide and 14 feet high. There are 12 of these sections that make up the unit. That comes out to 672 square feet. The request is not merely to have a minimal increase in size but to be able to use the manufactured plywood sections without having to tear them up to comply. It,is nearly impossible to tell the difference with the increase. As it now stands, the company would be forced to rip up 1 piece of plywood in order to comply and it will be paid for by some- body, in this case the client. Mr. 'Torrey also went on to say they had originally asked for an additional 20 percent to allow for cutouts. They agreed to drop that request, though the '71 legislature passed a beautification act which allowed sign sizes of 672 square feet plus 20 percent for extensions. Obie is asking for the increase without extensions. Manager said this question came to Council three months ago or so. It boiled down to two amendments for the Planning Commission to look at. That study was made and .: the' Planning Commission recommended not amending the code.. At.,tb-e COJIlJl}ittee of the Whole meeting. Council had voted to uphold that recommendation... To. change the decision would require a motion to refer it back to the Planning Commission or to "approve and ask that an ordinance be drawn to allow the change in size. , In answer to a question from Mr. Wood, Manager said that, in discussing the request with the representatives of the applicant, the Building Department sign staff and the Manager's office, it was agreed t~ere would be no substantial change in the intent of the orginance. At the Planning Commissio'n meeting, the planning staff made the point that they did not feel greatly concerned with the increase but with the equi~y as to whether it would be right to allow an increase in the square footage because. it was a standard of the industry, since they did not allow use of that argument in considering other kinds of violations to the sign code -- for example, the Holiday Inn. An industry standard is not valid for granting variance, so states the ordinance. I Mr. Murray wondered if many signs have been taken down that would have been allowable had this amendme~t 'been in effect before. Manager said none has been removed, that the Qbie signs are the only ones that fit into this category. Mr-.- Wood moved seconded by Mr. Murray' that an ordinance be drawn up to allow an increase in size from 650 square feet to 672 square feet. - Mr. Wood said the request sounds reasonable. If a business or citizen is not conforming to the ordinance he totally supports taking action against it. However, when there is a seeming inequity, changes should be at least considered. Mrs. Campbell was of the opinion that it would not be fair to make exception in this case. She noted that most of the non-conforming signs have been replaced,but she has not seen any billboards coming down as yet. 10/7/74 - 8 351