Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1968-0910 PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES FO~ PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED ASHLAND SIGN ORDINANCE (DRAFT NO, 6) SEPTEMBER 1~ 1968 7:30 P.Mo ASHLAND HIGH SCHOOL ENGLISH BUILDING A Public Hearing on the proposed Ashland Sign Ordinance was held in the Ashland High School English Building on the above date. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Richard Neill. Councilmen Jones, Roberts, Baker and Ward were present. Mayor Neill called the meeting to order and proceeded to review the ground rules which were established in order to keep the meeting orderly. Background Of Sign_gq<~_R_?~ision - Administrator Boshears - City Administrator Boshears gave a brief presentation which summarized the background information relating to the proposed sign ordinance. He pointed out that the type of ordinance regulating signs is not new in the City of Ashland. He then explained the appointments of various commissions and committees to study and improve the sign ordinance. He discussed the origination of the Ashland Businessmens' Association and how this group participated in the review of the sign ordinance drafts. He pointed out that this matter was discussed at several public hearings, council sessions, and study sessions. The purpose of all ot these meetings was to try to provide for a better overall sign ordinance. He indicated that the following two points should be kept in mind: (1) there are several new provisions contained in the proposed sign ordinance; {2 certain things should be eliminated which now exist in the sign ordinance. Spokesman for Opposition to Proposed Ordinance - Mr. Robert Voris, President of the Ashland Businessmens' Association - Mr. Voris indi- cated that the A.B.A. had previously presented to Council a two- page list of the main objections of the A.B.A. to the p~oposed sign ordinance. He indicated that at the September 5 meeting of the A.B.A., the ma]ority voted that 50 percent of the members of a new committee, which the Council should appoint, be A.B~A. members. This new commIttee should then draw up a new sign ordinance and be given six months to accomplish this. He also stated that the general feeling of the businessmen seems to be that they were not consulted or asked to serve on the committee and they would like to sit in on a committee and help draw up an acceptable sign ordinance. Mr. William Mansfield, Southern Oregon Sign Council - Mr~ Mansfield stated that he is quite opposed to many of the present provisions of the sign ordinance and would like to see some modifications. He said that it is a very far-reachir~slgn ordinance. The whole idea of the sign ordinance and the design review board should definitely be considered very carefully. The Southern Oregon Sign Council has set out in their letter to the City Council some of their principle objectzons. He, therefore, recommended that the Council not pass this oralnance in its present ~orm. A Council committee f~om w~thin the Council should be appointed to examine this ordinalice ~n much more detail in order to determine what kind Page 2 of a sign code should be passed for the City oi Ashland. The passage o~ this proposed ordinance would be against the interests o£ the sign industry as well as nhe businessmen and the public. Mr. Charles Dana, United Outdoor Advertising - Mr. Dana submitted to the Council a summary regarding oft-premise advertising. He presented various p~ctures to the Council which pointed out what an advantage oif-premlse adve~tlsln9 can be to the community. Spokesman rot Proponents of Proposed O~dlnance - Mrs, D. Rounds - Mrs. Rounds had previously submitted a petition of public opinion favoring the adoption of the proposed sign ordinance. It contained 316 signatures. She presented a report containing the comments and points of v~ew oI the s~gners of the petition. Sidney AlneFor~_tj], At__te~n~ey - Ashl ~~ eeE..e__l=gpment Co~]l sslon - Mr. Ainsworth indicated that he hopes that the Council will pass the proposed ordinance ~n the form in which it has beer] presented to the people, He stated that although there ms objection to off-premise advertising, the Cmty cert~lnly has the righ~ under the law to requIre the ~emoval oL these s~gns w~thln a £easonable length oi t~me. Pe then spoke briefly regard±ng aesthetic values~ He cited several cou£t cases which ~uled ~n rayor of aesthetic consmderatlons- Oregon Supreme Court has 9one on record ~n saying that aesthetic considerations are su~[lc~enn to regulate sign regulations. He cmted cases favoring a design seview board and spoke ~n fauoE o~ it. Individuals 9pa~s_~Id__EQ~_p_Er_opo_!e__d_Oz~d!_na_~!~e' - Mrs. Betty Bamforth, Bards inn Motel She stated thaE people come into to Ashland and stay at her motel because of the motel's flashing advertising slgn~ IL this sign was prohibited, it would not only be harmful to her business, but would be discrIminating against the many people who come into Ashland. Mr. Cliff Moran - He is opposed to the design review board because it is power put into the hands of a group ot people who will control the design and color of s~gns which are otherwise legal~ We should be allowed to use our own 3udgment. Mr, Wayne Lalouriete - He feels that we are faced with 9overnment entering ~nto the private lndlvidual's sphere of inZluence. Inasmuch as most o~ the people in Ashland do riot care, the drafting committee and the A BA! should get together to share their ideas and reach a successful solutIon. Mr. Jack Gruber - Since the businessmen make up the nucleus of the town, they should have a say in what the ordinance contains. We shoujdtry to re~mse old ordinance. Page 3 Mr, Reynolds - Spoke in favor of billboards and feels that we do not have enough. Mrs Roy HesteL - He feels that the people who would like more of a business-like atmosphere Lather than an aesthetic one, should have more to say on s~gn ordinance. Mr. Bob Jeter- Traveling businessmen rely upon signs for their sales. Th~s sign ordinance would be keeping business out of the City Instead of bringing it in. Mr. Gerald Allen - Each person who has his own business has the right to have his own views regarding how to bring people into his place of business, Mr. A1Bamforth, BaLds inn Motel - 'The design review board should be made up of more people who have somethin9 to do with signs, Mr. Don Dedrick - Each individual should be able type of sign. AS [onq as the electrical, safety, the inspector, that should be sufficient. to choose his own etc aspects satisfy Mr'. McVey - The Building inspector should be able to take care of all of the regulations Lhat the design review board Is designed to regulate. Mr. C. W. Smith - fie thinks that the Council shodld put it off a little bit and have r.,oLe people who are closely related to signs work with the Council and the A.B A and h~ve a l~ttle more Communication. Mr. Walt deBoer - We should not have discl. lm~natory rules. Let us move gradually and let the A~B,A prove themselves. Give them a chance to come up w~th a sign ordinance. Let us allow the A,B A~ to handle the sLtuation. individuals in Favor of PrQ?osed Ordinance - Mr. William Patton - Aesthetics are definitely good business. We have tQ have controls which are ialr to everyone, or we are all going to suffer. Mrs. Virginia Westerfmeld, Garden Club - Presented letter to Council which endorsed the proposed smgn ordinance. The Garden Club welcomes the chance to support the sagn code as anothez step to beautify the town. it is not unreasonable for the City to regulate how the City looks. Mr. Pete Cotton - Spoke ~n favor of the design review board. Mr. Don Cleaver Does not like the appearance of signs in general and sees no benefit from them. Page 4 Mr. Gary Afseth - He pointed out that the A~B.A and local businessmen have had an opportunity to meet on several occasions to revlew the previous drafts of the sign ordinance. Mrs. D. Rounds - She reviewed points which were brought up earlier. Spoke in favor o~ design review board. Mayor Nexll then opened the floor to questions from the Council, the A B.A~ or general audience. Jim Busch - if the Councll has not further questions pertaining to the sign ordinance, then a vote should be taken on the matter at this t~me. After further discussion of the design review board by Mrs~ Marilyn Koc~ and Mr. William MansLleld, C~ty Attorney Ha~ry Ske~ry spoke for a zew minutes on nhe o~dlnance~ He pointed out that our present sign ordinance is for one purpose only--physical safety. The new proposed ord~naDce not only lnjolves saiety, but protects and provides ~or the beauty of the area. The alternative which must be ~aced ~s whether we wlll accept a sign ordinance s~mply for safety or should it include beauty and cultnral aspects also. Mr. john B~lllngs nhen spoke br!elly on the same subject. At this time, Councilman O'Harra made h~s appeaLance Spokesman - O~p~!~.9~_~e~_~[~=.~!_~a~~ - Mr. Mansfield cmted various studzes which proved that business was definitely affected by signs. He stated nhat the present ordinance is unworkable. He d~scussed ~urther the design review board. He indicated that he hopes that the Council will do its best work in preparing a sign ordinance that is going to be as ~ree as possmble of litigation. spehfie~~ - ~Eopg~,9~g!e_~eI~9~_z_~_l_~dnel AlnswoLth Mr. Alnsworth pointed out that the drafting committee appointed by the Mayor Is ceztaln!y not the design review board, He spoke brielly regarding the makeup and purpose o~ the design review board. He indicated that l~ the sign oLdinance is not adopted, there will be no implementation of the downtown development plan. He then discussed highway billboards, indlcating that large bill- boards are needed on highways and ~reeways, but certainly not in the business district. After reviewing the economic value of signs, he concluded by saying that he teeis that the present p~oposed sign ordinance carrles out the ~ntent of the people o£ Ashland. After further discussion fegardln9 the sign levlew board and other aspects of the proposed sign ordinance, Mayor Neill concluded the meeting by indicating that a motmon would be in order. Roberts moved that the Council set a study session to Eurther review the s~xth draft o% the ord~nance~ Ward seconded the motion~ Roll call carried unanimously. There being no further business at this time, the Council unanimously agreed to adjourn, subject to the call or the Mayor- City Recorder