07/26/1976 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

---.- trees, and from June 24 to July 6 for firework sales. Councilman Haws wondered it if would be better to limit the period for fireworks sales to midnight of July 4, then allow two days for removing the stands. Mr. Saul answered that the amendment could be e so worded, but he didn't anticipate any problem under the provision as now written. Mr. Haws turned to the signing provisions and wondered whether they would be practical - for fireworks or tree stands - 32 square feet, either wall-mounted or pole-mounted with a maximum eight-foot height. Mr. Saul responded that that particular standard was based on observations of the type of signing now being used for these types of sales. The intent was to limit signs in terms of the overall maximum size that was consistent with the overall provisions of the sign code. Public hearing was opened. Ed Lundberg, 4125 Garden, questioned the restrictions on signs for sale of Christmas trees and fireworks, but withdrew his objections upon advice from Mr. Saul that signs up to 32 square feet wall- or pole-mounted would be allowed under the proposed amendment. Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. Councilwoman Shirey noted that while wall-mounted signs would be restricted so far as location on a site, it appeared a pole-mounted sign could be located any place on a site rather than just at the entrance, which she preferred. Mr. Saul thought some reason would have to be used in that regard because there were code restrictions covering on- and off-premise advertising. While signs were feasible at the entrance to a shop or store normally, signs for these types of sales might be loacted otherwise. Councilman Murray responded to concerns previously expressed by Mr. Bradley with re- gard to excluding Christmas tree sales from residential lots. He said this was no . change from the present law, such sales were permitted now only through administra- tive oversight. He said there was no dearth of commercial areas within walking dis- tance of residential areas so excluding them from residential areas would not cause undue hardship. Finally, he said, such sales created considerable hassles when located near residences - driveways were blocked, lawns trampled, etc. Councilman Haws asked why this amendment should not correspond to state law wherein a permit is required 15 days prior to the sale of fireworks. Mr. Saul answered that this amendment would not require a permit. He said it had been discussed with both the building and fire departments and a determination made that since the state fire marshal's office covers the basic licensing for sale of fireworks, there was no need for city effort in that eregard. However, he added, anyone wishing to sell firewalks has to apply through the local fire department for the state permit and at that time the proposed location is checked to be sure it is in either a commercial or industrial zone. Councilman Keller asked why December 1 was chosen for the beginning date of Christmas tree sales; why not allow them to begin in November? Mr. Saul answered that there had not been extensive research on that aspect~ no on was aware of tree lots opened prior to December 1 in previous years. Councilman Hamel suggested the day after Thanksgiving might be appropriate, since most people start Christmas preparations about that time. Mr. Keller agreed. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Hamel to amend the ordinance so as to permit start of Christmas tree sales on the day after Thanksgiving rather than . December 1. Motion carried - Council members Keller, Haws, Beal, Murray, and Hamel voting aye; Councilwoman Shirey voting no. '-' 7/26/76 - 10 31~