01-03-1966 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

It was moved by Councilman Herrin, seconded by Councdlm~n Bmrk and carried, that Council approve the reclassification and in~ruct the City Attorney to prepare an amending ordinance according to Exhibit AA 572 B. NEARING - Hearing was opened on Amendment A.A. 574 - Application 574 filed by Harold SEGERSTROM Segerstrcm proposing the amend- ment of Sectional District Map 26-5-10 by reclassii~ying from R i and R ~ to the C 4 district property on the west side of Bristol between Segerstrom and Alton. Planning Resolution 5759 recommended approval. Mr. Ted Adsit, Planning Consultant for applicant, stated the owners of the property did not object to it being placed Lu CR zone when new CR zoning is adopted. There being no further testimony, the hearing was closed. It was moved by Councilman B~rk, seconded by Councilman Gilmore amd carried, that Council approve the reclassification and instruct the City Attorney to prepare an amending ordinance according to E~hibit AA 574 A. HEARING - Hearing was opened on Appeal 171 APPEAL 171 - BIRD filed by Donald M. Bird fram C.U.P. 209 the Planning Commission' s denial of Conditional Use Permit 209 to construct a 28½' high electrical advertising sign at 1625 E. 17th in C 5 district. The Clerk reported that notices were mailed on December 28, 1965, and no written communications had been received. Mr. Edward Agnew, Santa Aha Neon Sign Company, displayed pictures of the proposed sign and area where sign was to be located. He stated the main objection by the Planning Co~mission was that the sign was a billboard. He also stated in this district a 35' sign is allowed and that Mr. Bird was not buying the sign but leasing for five years. Mr. Donald M. Bird, applicant, expressed to Council that a precedent was not being set in the area because the zoning allowed this type of sign; the owner of the property approved this type of sign. The only reason for the conditional use permit is because the business will be located 20' from the sign and it is therefore classified as a billboard. Mr. George Glass, Keystone Investment Company, owners of the building Mr. Bird is leasing, spoke in opposition to the sign stating it would mar the attractiveness of the building; that there are 30 tenants none of whom have out of proportion signs; that developers on 17th have built traditional style buildings for professions. Mr. Egon Gardner, 1601 E. 17th, told Council when he sold the lot he did not understand that there were going to be any big signs put up, and he is not in favor of high-rise signs in area. Mr. Don Gittleson, 13572 Emperor Drive, developer of homes at 19th and Mabury, objected to the sign because it would affect the beauty of the area. Mr. Bird and Mr. Agnew spoke in rebuttal saying this sign would not detract from the beauty of the area; that it could be lowered and conditions met. Mr. Ron Elleboudt, owner of the lot, stated he doubted this sign would be alone for more than a year. There being no further testimony, the hearing was closed. The Planning Director reported this is not an on-site accessory sign by definition so it is classified as a billboard; that the owners along East Seventeenth have imposed voluntarily upon themselves sign restrictions, that the two exceptions -- the OJeda sign was granted by variance and the Quill sign was illegally constructed; that the City has a minimum sign control ordinance. CITY COUNCIL - 439 - January 3, 1966