7.3. SR 03-17-2014 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City of Elk=' Request for Action River To Item Number Mayor and City Council 7.3 Agenda Section Meeting Date Prepared by Public Hearinj March 17, 2014 Zack Carlton,Planner I Item Description Reviewed by Ordinance Amendment:Amend Language Jeremy Barnhart,Deputy Director, CODD Regarding Billboards, Case No. OA 14-01 Reviewed by Cal Portner, City Administrator Action Requested Approve or deny,by motion,the draft ordinance allowing billboards as a conditional use in the I-2 zoning district,as written. Staff and the Planning Commission do not recommend approval. Background/Discussion Through the development of the 2013 sign ordinance revision there was much discussion regarding the desirability of adding opportunities for additional advertising signs (billboards) in the I-2 zoning district. Billboards are currently a permitted use in the C-3, I-1, and I-2 zoning districts, as the principal use,with location stipulations. The principal use clause requires the billboard to be removed when the property becomes more valuable for another more desirable use, (office building, manufacturing facility, etc.) and the owner elects to remove the sign in favor of the building. Without the principal use clause, there is virtually no reason for the sign to be removed. Public Hearing Steve Anderson,with Franklin Outdoor Advertising, spoke in support of the amendment. He stated that the business community desires the additional advertising space, and that he feels a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is a good compromise. Staff received no other comments for or against the amendment. Planning Commission The Commission discussed the possibility of amending the draft ordinance to include a 20-year time limit with the CUP for a billboard, similar to the City of Rogers, to reduce potential long-term impacts. One Commissioner expressed his support for the amendment and stated he believed this would benefit the business community. The motion was defeated by a 3-2 vote. The Planning Commission also discussed the existing billboard regulations and made note that the opportunity for billboards in the I-2 district already exists. Members of the Commission statedthey were not in support of the amendment,as a property owner already has the ability to construct a billboard on their land by creating a separate parcel. They noted that this is an additional obstacle to construction but if a property owner wanted one they could make it happen with the current ordinance. The Planning Commission voted 4-1 not to approve the ordinance amendment. P a w E A E U s r NaA f RE]