Laserfiche WebLink
<br />e council support on this issue. Mr. Holmer said that he was also dissatisfied <br /> with council action on this issue. <br /> Mr. Holmer moved, seconded by Ms. Ehrman, to reconsider Mr. <br /> Bennett's motion mandating a 90-day moratorium on billboards <br /> over 100 square feet. Roll call vote; the motion carried <br /> unanimously, 6:0. <br /> Mr. Sercombe, City Attorney, indicated that Mr. Bennett's motion attempted to <br /> change three aspects of the ordinance proposed for Monday night: to change <br /> the definition of billboard to designate any sign with a single face greater <br /> than 100 square feet, to decrease the period of the moratorium from 180 days <br /> to 90 days, and to except the Hilton's application for a billboard to be <br /> located on 1-5 from this moratorium. Mr. Sercombe suggested that wording for <br /> exception the Hilton's application should read lito except any applications <br /> for permits for billboards for property abutting 1-5.11 <br /> Responding to a question from Mr. Miller, Mr. Sercombe said that if the <br /> council wanted to impose a moratorium on mini-billboards only, they could do <br /> so by amending the ordinance that was before the council at the public <br /> hearing. These mini-billboards are defined as signs of a single face <br /> greater than 100 square feet and less than 200 square feet. <br /> Mr. Bennett indicated that the intention of his motion was to include a <br /> moratorium on mini-billboards as well as standard-sized billboards. His <br /> perception of the purpose of Planning Commission's Sign Code update was to <br />- make recommendations for change in a code that will serve as future poliCY <br /> for all types of billboards. <br /> Mr. Holmer said that he cannot support any motion which provides for a <br /> moratorium on all billboards. He said that the Planning Commission has <br /> failed to deal with this issue in a timely manner and felt that by not <br /> adopting a moratorium, the council will be able to pressure the Planning <br /> Commission into drafting an ordinance that will be acceptable to the entire <br /> council. <br /> Ms. Ehrman said that this is not the only issue that the Planning Commission <br /> has to deal with, and its inability to deal with this issue in the specified <br /> time frame should not be taken out on the community. She added that although <br /> 90 days might not be sufficient time for Planning Commission review, it is an <br /> acceptable compromise. In light of the 20 billboard applications that are <br /> exempted from this moratorium, she felt that the moratorium should include <br /> all billboards that are 100 square feet or greater. Ms. Bascom agreed that <br /> although 90 days might be restrictive, it should be sufficient time to <br /> evaluate the success of such a moratorium on billboards. <br /> Ms. Schue acknowledged that although a further proliferation of billboards is <br /> unlikely if a moratorium were adopted, the council should not risk having any <br /> number of billboards. She is, therefore, in favor of the proposed <br /> moratorium. <br />e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 1989 Page 2 <br />