Agenda - 06-21-2016 - 5-a - Minutes

Browse Search

7 1 • After the public hearing materials published and released, Attorney's office expressed 2 concern revised section could be interpreted to prohibit signage within residential 3 districts altogether. 4 • After conferring with the Attorney's staff revised the language to read as follows (change 5 notes in Green Bold Underlined Text): 6 7 NOTICE OF MODIFICATION: 8 • Both Planning staff and the Attorney's office believes this achieves the original intent of 9 the proposed modification and provide a definitive, enforceable, standard moving 10 forward. 11 12 Commissioner Price asked how this amendment will affect mixed-use developments. 13 Michael Harvey said the Board of County Commissioners would have the authority to 14 define the signage in mixed-use properties. 15 Commissioner Price said what is trying to be achieved with this new language. 16 Michael Harvey said an example is the Efland grocery store, which is surrounded by 17 residential areas. He said a huge neon sign would be inappropriate in an area such as this. 18 Commissioner Jacobs said that no changes are being made regarding electronic signs. 19 Michael Harvey said a standard is being adopted that heretofore did not exist. 20 Commissioner Jacobs said this is an improvement. 21 Commissioner Jacobs asked if other proposed changes will be considered in the future. 22 Michael Harvey said he is working with the County Attorney's office on these proposed 23 amendments, and there is no set time to bring this item back to the Board. He said periodic 24 updates can be provided, or the Board of County Commissioners can direct staff to come back 25 at a specific time. 26 Commissioner Jacobs said an open-ended timeframe is not a satisfactory resolution, 27 and perhaps the Board of County Commissioners can provide a reasonable time frame to 28 provide a conclusion to this discussion. 29 Commissioner Dorosin asked Commissioner Jacobs if his concerns are related to some 30 of the more generic aspects of the amendment or the outcome of the pending case before the 31 courts. 32 Commissioner Jacobs said the court case is part of it, but there are other standards that 33 could be improved which are not yet being discussed. He said he would be inclined to leave the 34 content question to the attorneys. 35 Commissioner Dorosin said it may be helpful to have a time set to discuss the more 36 generic issues. 37 Michael Harvey said this may be better discussed at a future work session where the 38 Board could provide individual comments and/or direction, while staff and the Attorney's office 39 digest the ramifications of the pending legal case. 40 Commissioner Burroughs referred to the electronic moveable copy, and asked if the 41 intent was to decrease the distraction for drivers. 42 Michael Harvey said yes, to decrease the distraction, but also to allow some degree of 43 flexibility with the digital signs. 44 Commissioner Burroughs said a once an hour change in a digital sign does not seem 45 too frequent. 46 Michael Harvey said these types of signs are currently prohibited outright, and this 47 amendment would allow some flexibility, which does not currently exist. 48 Commissioner Burroughs asked if a sign would be commercially viable, if only allowed to 49 change once an hour. She said she would be inclined to strike the language pertaining to a 50 maximum of 8 sign changes in a 24-hour period. 51 Michael Harvey said the goal was to stay within the typical business operating hours and 52 avoid signs changing all night long, when a business is closed. 53 Commissioner Burroughs said she would be interested in what the other Commissioners 54 had to say on this topic.