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

Home Browse Search

e cities, he said staff realized how generous Eugene has been with billboards and how much of a potential there is for more to be constructed. Mr. Sercombe clarified that when the distinctions between on-premises identity signs and off-premises commercial signs were eliminated, a second problem of size limitation became apparent. ~reviously, up to 350 feet of signage was allowed in most districts, although the signs were limited in content to identity signs. Once the content distinction is removed, he said anything can be advertised on the sign, thus allowing billboards where only identity signs used to be permitted. Mr. Holmer called for a recess at 9:30 p.m. Mr. Holmer reconvened the meeting at 9:40 p.m. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Ms. Ehrman, that the council defer action on the item and asked staff to return to the council with further information. Mr. Miller said he is concerned about the effects an unspecified time delay will have on the industry. In response to a question from Mr. Miller, Mr. Smith said staff can return to the council in a week with more information. Mr. Rutan said he agrees with Mr. Miller's concerns, although he said one week is not enough time for staff to thoroughly review the testimony. He said staff should return after one month. He said the scope of that review should be the interim sign ordinance and the testimony before the council. e Ms. Wooten suggested that the council use its upcoming quarterly process session as a work session to review the issue. Mr. Bascom said that is not the intent of her motion. She said she prefers the council spend its time on the permanent revisions instead of the interim code. Mr. Miller suggested setting aside a noon work session to discuss the issue. Mr. Gleason said staff will review the testimony and consult with the sign industry and return to the council in a month. He said there is some risk, although that amount of time does not greatly increase the City's exposure to legal action. Ms. Bascom called for the question. Roll call vote; the question was called 4:3, with Councilors Bascom, Holmer, Rutan, and Schue voting aye, and Councilors Ehrman, Miller, and Wooten voting nay. Roll call vote on the original motion; the motion carried 6:1, with Councilors Bascom, Rutan, Ehrman, Holmer, Schue, and Miller voting aye, and Councilor W00ten voting nay. Ms. Wooten said she voted against the motion beca~se the council needs to accommodate public and staff concerns in as expedient a manner as possible. She said she is not satisfied with having a revision brought before the council that reflects the testimony tonight. She said she respects the e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 23, 1988 Page 8