05/23/1988 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Ms. Wooten asked why the changes are being made. Mr. Smith said staff is concerned about the potential for controversy if a significant number of billboards are erected during the time the City is working on a revised sign code. Mr. Smith said the second proposed amendment is: at the end of Section 3, lithe provisions of Section 8.813 of this code requiring action by the Planning Commission, are waived." Mr. Smith said the 1968 code included a definition of where billboards may be allowed and restricted them to highway-oriented sign districts and industrial districts. He said from 1968 to 1975 there was confusion over the definition of street frontage in the code. As a result of that confusion, there were several appeals to the Sign Code Board of Appeals over City denial of billboard permits. In 1975, the City Council issued a ruling that a property has to have vehicular access in order for a billboard to be permitted. This ruling created a situation where billboards are allowed on such streets as 6th and 7th avenues and Coburg Road, but banned from all limited access facilities including Beltline, 1-105, and Interstate 5. Mr. Smith said members of the sign industry will be testifying tonight that the ruling is illogical and will propose removing the requirement for vehicular access. If that occurs, he said it is likely that six to nine more billboards would be allowed throughout the city. e Mr. Smith said staff has tried to preserve as much of the original City Council intent in the interim sign code. Under the interim code, Mr. Smith said murals will be allowed up to 200 to 350 square feet, depending on the council's decision on the amendments. Mr. Holmer opened the public hearing. Ron Walro, 777 High Street, said he represents 3M National Advertising. He said he is against the current interim sign code and the proposed amendments, even though he said they are well-intentioned. He suggested the council delay action on the interim code for one month, and during that time instruct staff to work with the sign industry to work out some of the problems. Mr. Walro distributed to the council copies of the minutes of the 1975 City Council meeting during which the issue of variances was discussed. He said reducing the minimum size of billboards to 200 feet could conceivably lead to hundreds of "midgetll billboards in the community--a decision that contradicts the intent of the interim code. Mr. Walro pointed out the staff attempting to administer the Sign Code n0W is different from the 1975 staff. He said this can be addressed by charging staff to meet with the sign industry to work on some of the contradictions. He said this would lead to a calmer six to nine months during which the City can revise the original code. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 23, 1988 Page 4