Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Planning Commission Minutes <br />June 26, 1990 <br /> <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />regarding both the number of billboards and the size of billboards. <br />Ms. Szklarski reviewed staff's recommendations in regards to these <br />options. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson (Acting Chair) opened the public hearing. <br /> <br />Richard Mlodzik of Skoglund Communications, Inc. stated that he <br />questioned the accuracy of some of Mr. Keane's statistics. Mr. Mlodzik <br />indicated that he has not run across a community that requires 3,000 <br />foot spacing as indicated in Mr. Keane's memo. Mr. Mlodzik was also in <br />disagreement with Mr. Keane's statement regarding "monopoles". He was <br />not aware of any community that required a "monopole" pylon type <br />construction for billboards. Mr. Keane indicated that the typical <br />poster billboard is 250 sq. ft. Mr. Mlodzik questioned if Mr. Keane <br />was referring to the inside dimensions, not including the outer trim <br />and edge. Mr. Mlodzik stated that 300 ft. is the industry's standard <br />for billboard sign area. <br /> <br />Rob Vanvalkenburg was concerned with staff's recommendation of 2,000 ft <br />spacing between signs. Mr. Vanvalkenburg stated that he was opposed to <br />getting rid of all billboards as businesses cannot survive without <br />billboards. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Steve Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator indicated that the 2,000 <br />ft. spacing is on the same side of the road. Mr. Rohlf stated that <br />this is the same as a 1,000 ft. spacing on both sides of the road. He <br />indicated that many communities have a 1,000 ft. spacing but it covers <br />both sides of the road. <br /> <br />James Kleinke of Franklin Outdoor Advertising Company stated that they <br />were requesting additional time to work with staff and the City <br />Attorney on this matter in order to provide the Planning and City <br />Council with a revised compromise. Mr. Kleinke then stated that this <br />was a very critical issue for the advertising industry. Steve Rohlf <br />suggested that the outdoor advertising companies would have time before <br />the next City Council meeting (July 16, 1990) to come up with a new <br />proposal regarding their concerns. <br /> <br />Keith Franklin, Franklin Outdoor Advertising, raised the question as to <br />how billboards were going to be eliminated. Mr. Rohlf answered that <br />the billboards would be thinned out as property develops. The larger <br />spacing does not eliminate any signs, as the existing signs are <br />grandfathered in. Mr. Franklin then stated that the state standard, is <br />300 ft. setback from an intersection. The Planning Commission was in <br />agreement with Mr. Franklin and suggested changing staff's <br />recommendation of 200 ft. setback from an intersection to 300 ft. to <br />comply with the state standards. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson (Acting Chair) closed the public hearing. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Discussion ensued regarding monopole type construction for billboards. <br />It was the general consensus of the Planning Commission that all future <br />advertising signs should have monopoles. <br />