Laserfiche WebLink
<br />e <br /> <br />M~. Wooten will not support the amendment because the council should have <br />consistent practices. She said citizens have not lost their rights even <br />though the council does not hear many appeals. <br /> <br />Mr. Holmer said he will support the amendment because the Supreme Court <br />process of choosing cases is appropriate. He said the council will <br />discuss administrative and policy-making roles next month; consequently, <br />the appeal process should not be changed now. <br /> <br />Mr. Rutan emphasized that the change involves only the Sign Code and the <br />impact of the code has been felt. He said appeals should involve only new <br />signs and probably will not be crucial, <br /> <br />Roll call vote; the motion failed 3:5 with Councilors <br />Hansen, Holmer, and Miller voting aye and Councilors Schue, <br />Wooten, Bascom, Rutan, and Ehrman voting nay. <br /> <br />Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Mr. Holmer, to amend the <br />motion to delete Subsections 2 and 3 of Section 8.685(b) <br />and include a Subsection indicating that existing <br />flashing, chasing, and scintillating lights on signs <br />will be permitted for five years. <br /> <br />Answering questions from Ms. Ehrman and Ms. Bascom, Mr. Croteau said signs <br />with flashing lights are expensive and there are some in the city now. Mr. <br />Rutan said the amendment probably would prohibit fiber optic signs. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Responding to questions from Ms. Wooten, Mr. Hansen said the intent of his <br />motion is to prohibit flashing, chasing, and scintillating lights on <br />signs. Approval of the amendment probably would mean the Hult Center <br />could not have a flashing sign. <br /> <br />Ms. Ehrman said she does not have enough information to make a decision <br />about flashing signs. She would like to know how many exist, how much <br />they cost, and whether the amendment would affect fiber optics signs. <br /> <br />Mr. Rutan agreed with Ms. Ehrman. He said his company is investigating <br />fiber optics and, if the council discusses them, he will declare a <br />conflict of interest. <br /> <br />Mr. Gleason suggested the staff investigate the impact of the proposed <br />amendment and present the issue to the council at another time. Mr. <br />Hansen agreed to the suggestion. <br /> <br />Mr. Hansen and Mr. Holmer withdrew the motion. <br /> <br />Mr. Hansen moved to amend the motion to delete <br />the change that would permit banners to be <br />200 square feet. The motion was not seconded. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council <br /> <br />June 11, 1986 <br /> <br />Page 5 <br />