Minutes 01/28/1969 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

l)<) {J \/ TUESDAY JANUARY 28, 1969 At its regular meeting on January 16, 1969, the City Planning Commission gave consideration to a petition submitted by Attorney John Epperly on behalf of Lamar Dean Outdoor Advertising Company requesting certain amandments to the sign section of the City's Zoning Ordinance. The Commission discussed at some length with Attorney Epperly each of the amendments as proposed by Lamar Dean. Following this illSclssion, the Commission voted unanimously to recommend to Council that the sign section of the Zoning Ordinance be left as is with no changes. In its discussions with Attorney Epperly the Commission reviewed its deliberation of the Sign Ordinance at the time of its writing. The Commission expressed to Mr. Epperly its original intent as having been to minimize through these controls any visual congestion which mighc; be caused by a possible profusion of outdoor advertising signs along the highways leading into the City. It was their feeling that this original intent had not changed over the period of the last five years. Expressed in general terms, the following changes to the present ordinance were suggested by Lamar Dean Outdoor Advertising Company: 1 . The present ordinance requires a 25-foot setback for nonaccessory ground signs in every district in which they are allowed. The suggested change would allow the same setback as provided for buildings in the same district. Note: The reason for the 25-foot setback in the present ordinance was to minimize the possibility of these large signs falling into the street in a high wind storm. This has occurred in the past. 2. The present ordinance requires that a nonaccessory sign be erected a minimum of 100 feet from any other nonaccessory sign or building. In the event a new building is erected within 100 feet of a non- accessory sign then existing that Sign Company is given a period of two years in which to move the sign to conform to the 100-foot distance. The suggested change would require the sign to stay 100 feet from any other nonaccessory sign on property in the same ownership. Note: The Commission felt it was undesirable to allow the possible profusion and congestion of signs which would be per- mitted under this change. Such a change would mean that were there a series of 50-foot lots, whether occupied by buildings or not, so long as there was room on the lot for an outdoor advertising sign it would be permitted on each lot with the result that it would be possible to have an outdoor advertising sign against a building on an adjoining lot under separate ownership since there would be no side line setbacks for either the sign or the building.