Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-11-04 PZC MINUTES... • CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 4, 1981 I. CALL TO ORDER. The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Judith B. Pierson. Members preseno: Draper, McBrayer, Pierson, Senti, Barbr~, Becker, Carson, Tanguma, Allen Powers, Ex-officio Members absent: None Also present: Assistant Director D. A. Romans Associate Planner Susan King Planner I Larry Yenglin Planner I Harold Stitt Planning Intern Jeri Linder EDDA Director Mike Haviland II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Chairman Pierson stated that the Minutes of October 20, 1981, were to be considered for approval. Carson moved: Tanguma seconded: The Minutes of the October 20, 1981, meeting be approved as written. AYES: Draper, McBrayer, Senti, Barbre, Becker, Carson, Tanguma, Allen NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Pierson ABSENT: None . The motion carried. III. SIGN CODE CASE #9-81 The Public Hearing on the proposed revision of §22.7 of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, the Sign Code, was opened. Susan Powers, Director of Community Development, made a presentation of the proposed Sign Code. She stated the staff has reviewed the existing Sign Code along with Sign Codes in other cities. Ms. Powers indicated the staff has held several meetings with car dealers and shopping center representatives in addition to the public meetings sponsored by the Planning Commission . Ms. Pierson asked if there were other persons in the audience that wanted to address the Commission, or had questions? Frank McLaughlin, owner of the Gothic Theatre, voiced his con- cern that the proposed Sign Code could cause a hardship for his I -2- business. He noted the proposed Code prohibits marquees from projecting over the City right-of-way. Mr. McLaughlin requested the Commission to take into consideration the amount of time and money involved in bringing the sign into conformance and possibly the lo~s of the business. Ms. Powers stated any appeals to the Sign Code would be heard before the Board of Adjustment and Appeals. She questioned whether or not Mr. McLaughlin's sign was in compliance. Harry Arkin, attorney for Burt Chevrolet, expressed his concern for making the City of Englewood more attractive. He indicated the 30-day period for removal of an abandoned sign may not be a feasible time period. There are instances where the owner may not have a new tenant within that 30-day period. He stated in some instances, the owner would be removing the sign one week and erecting it within the next week simply beca~se it surpa~sed the 30-day time period. Mr. Arkin urged the Commission to consider the cost to the businesses to bring existing signs into conformance. He indica- ted that many businesses have signs that conform to the existing Code, yet would not conform to the proposed Sign Code. The cost to bring these signs into conformance could be staggering; it could, in fact, cause many smaller businesses to close their shops. Mr. Arkin indicated that in some instances third party signs should be allowed . He noted the car wash adjacent to Burt Chevrolet does not front on Broadway, and the sign on the Burt property is the only effective exposure that the business has. Mr. Arkin stated that the proposed Sign Code is too restrictive, and again urged the Commission to consider the cost to the business. Mr. Arkin stated the concept of amortization is not unfair , but questioned the time period that is proposed. He no~ed that many signs are leased for a period of five (5) or more years. The signs may not conform to the proposed Sign Code, but this factor would not release the business from the obligations of the lease. In summary, Mr. Arkin stated the proposed Sign Code contains in- sufficient definitions, is overly broad, over tough and unfair to the businesses in the community. George Allen left the meeting at 8:30 P.M. Tim Ausfahl, 4509 South Broadway, questioned whether the out- door display of merchandise would include the merchandise that is stored within a fenced area. Ms. Powers indicated that a definition of outdoor advertising should be included in the proposed Code . She noted the intent of the Code is to prohibit any outdoor display of merchandise that ~ould attract people to the business. Ms. Powers stat~d there does need to be some work on the definition of outdoor advertising . The i$sue of screening requirements for outdoor -3- displays is not related to the public hearing tonight, nor is there a requirement in the proposed Sign Code. Ms. Powers sug- gested that the Code should prohibit public displays of merchandise on City right-of-way. Steve Uhl, representative from Gordon Sign Company, noted the natural attrition rate would take care of many of the signs that would be non-conforming under the proposed Code, which could replace the amortization clause in the Code. Mr. Uhl indicated that 100 square feet of sign area per face is not a v e ry large amount wh~n the sign is placed outside and 30 feet in the air. He stated that the existing Code is a workable Code, and expressed his desire to have it enforced. Mr. Uhl stated the cost to lower a sign to within the 20-foot height requirement could start at approximately $1,500 and could be a financial burden to some businesses. Mrs. Pierson declared a recess at 8:45 P.M. The Commission reconvened at 9:00 P.M. with the following present: Commissioners Draper, McBrayer, Pierson, Senti, Barbre, Becker, Carson, Tanguma. Absent: Commissioner Allen. Sue Nuce, representative from McDonald's informed the Commission that a new McDonald's restaurant was to ooen soon and that the existing building would be removed. She indicated the new signs would conform to the present Code, but some would be in violation of the proposed Code. Ms. Nuce stated it was too late to guess at what type of sign will meet the proposed Sign Code. She indicated the signs will be installed within the next few weeks. Earl Reynolds, representative from Cinderell~ City, indicated the roof signs at the center will be removed, but not within the 60-day time limit as required by the proposed Sign Code. Mr. Reynolds stated the removal of the signs in the center will be done within a six (6) month time span. Additionally, the center has proposed to provide directional signs on the parking area and the size allowed by the Code would not be sufficient to allow for proper viewing by the motorists. Jerry Feather, owner of the Dart Board, 3467 South Broadway, voiced his concern that the smaller businepses will be put in a financial hardship with the cost of repl~cing their existing signs. Jeanette Bush, part owner of the Dry Creek Shopping Center, indicated the existing sign at the center does not meet the present ~ign Code, and noted the previous owner was not notified that the sign was not in conformance with the present Code. She questioned whether the owners would be notified that their signs are not conforming to the proposed Code. She was told that they would be notified. -4- Mike Haviland, EDDA Executive Director, stated as Director, he was very concerned with the signage presently in the downtown area. He indicated there is a need for a more stringent code and a solution to some of the problems existing in the community. Mr. Haviland noted the Commission must make changes to the Sign Code that are reasonable and are not going to impose a major hardship upon the businesses in the community. Mr. Haviland n o t ed the present Code is not giving the City a good quality or character, which is why the present Code needs to be revised . He urged the Planning and Zoning Commission to support the revised Sign Code. Phil Grimm , Fr eeman Signs, noted the present Sign Code is a good Code and very workable. He indicated the number of signs should be increased as well as the area of the sign. He noted that in ma n y cases, the square footage of both sides of the sign may still be in violation of the Code. He noted lowering the signs may not be the answer to bringing the sign into conformance. Additionally, Mr. Grimm noted the Sign Code is approximately seven years old, and still a very workable Code that does not need to be revised. Greg Ireton, President of First National Bank of Englewood, voiced his conc ern that the present Sign Code has not been enforced suff i ciently and questioned what the outcome would be if it were enforced properly. Mr. Ireton asked if a survey had been done to determine the cost to the businesses to bring their signs into conformance with the proposed Sign Code. Mr . Ireton noted the roof sign at First National Bank is aesthetically pleasing to the community and removal of the sign would destroy the "landmark". Brad Sharp , ma nager of Showbiz Pizza, stressed his concern that the proposed Code is too vague in its definitions such as the definition of outdoor advertising displays. Becker moved : McBrayer seconded : The Public Hearing be closed. AYES: Draper, McBrayer, Pierson, Senti, Barbre, Becker, Carson, Tangum a NAYS: None ABSENT : Allen The motion c a rr ied. Discussion ensued. Tanguma mo v ed : Carson seconded : To table the decision on the Sign Code until December 1, 1981. A · ' -5- l I AYES: Draper, Tanguma NAYS: None ABSENT: Allen McBrayer, Pierson, Senti, Barbre, Becker, Ca~son, I The motion carried. IV. PUBLIC FORUM. No member of the audience indicated a desire to address the Conrrnission. V. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE. Ms. Powers informed the Commission that on November 17th, there will be a presentation on the Cherry Hills Hotel, and on Dec~mber 8th, the Adult Center will be qsking for an extension of time to cease operation. VI. COMMISSION'S CHOJCE. Mrs. Pierson requested that the December 8th meeting be the last meeting of the year unless something arises that requires an additional meeting. The meetting was adjourned at 9:50 P.M. /?1«'~~ ~ MARION CONLEY ?fl-:/~ RECORDING SECRETARY PRO TEM