HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z MINUTES DECEMBER 14, 1994~~
DATE: (121494)
Planning& Zoninq Work Meeting
12/14/94
6:00 P. M.
Signs
Present: Chairman: John Millar
Members: Davawn Beattie
Jim Long
Marsha Bjornn
Mary Ann Mounts
Brad Archibald
Jerry Jeppesen
John Watson
Richard Smith (Arriving at end of meeting)
Eric Erickson (also attending)
City Clerk: Rose Bagley
Attorney: J. D. Hancock
Engineer: Joe Laird
Also Present: Brook Pasaey, Apartment Owners- Garth Oakey, Randy
Landon, and representing Young Sign Company- Jerry Steadman.
RE WORK ON SIGN ORDINANCE - SIZE OF SIGNS, APARTMENTS, ETC.
TOPIC: (300,123,,,SIGN ORDINANCE,5IGNS,APARTMENTS)
Randy stated that the apartment owners are not against regulating the
signs, but they would like a size to work with. 2 x 4 is too small.
John asked what was realistic?
Garth- he would like to regulate how a sign looks. It would be nice if
we could regulate the home made back yard built signs. His apartment
sets back off the road, so if you limit them to a small sign, no one
would ever see it.
John showed the group some pictures he had taken of some apartment
signs. (discussion the kind, how they looked and size) Randy
suggested that most of the signs around, if you could have them about
4 x 8 as a maximum they would work pretty good. John Millar said most
of them, as he looked around town were more like 4 x 4. It seemed like
the bigger the apartment complex the smaller the sign. Randy suggested
that the signs did not become much of a problem until we were over
built. When we over built then competition got strict and people
started putting the extra signs out. Discussion about putting
information. on signs. John explained one is a permanent sign,
information could be on a temporary sign. Garth said most to the big
complexes don't use temporary signs.
Jim suggested that he could see coming to town trying to find a place
for his son or daughter to live, and a bigger sign would help him find •
the apartment. As a member of P & Z and a Landscape Architect, that is
terrible. John felt that the sign is not what fills the apartment.
~a~
`f• John asked what about free standing vs attached? Garth said some of
the apartment owners had a concern about attached signs, because their
apartments set back from the road or they have siding on their
buildings. John said some of the signs that are free standing looked
awful, others were small and set back and landscaped around Brook
stated that cost is a factor when you get into individual letters vs a
painted sign.
Jim discussed a design review for signs. Garth asked if a day care
center would fall under the same classification as an apartment? It
would depend on what zone they were in. Garth felt that 4 x 8 foot for
a sign would be adequate. Garth said now he is conscious of his signs
and maybe should upgrade. Jim- maybe that is purpose to make people
upgrade their signs. Discussion on free standing signs, if cars are
parked around the sign, you can't see it. Brook said if you put the
lettering on the building, it might exceed the size of 4 x 8 if the
name of the complex has a long name. Jim suggested that if they want
to put a sign up that is out of conformance of the ordinance, it would
need to be reviewed by Planning & Zoning.
Jerry Steadman- He sat on the Community Development Commission in
Pocatello that reviewed all the exceptions to their sign ordinance and
prior to that he sat on a committee where they drew up a sign
ordinance, which took two years and the ordinance still isn't full
proof. You could run yourself ragged if everything is the exception to
• the rule. The apartment complex are dependent on the zone they are
in. If they are in a Commercial zone, he did not see anyway to
restrict the size to 32 square .feet. If it is zoned Residential this
committee should have the concern of residents around that complex and
should be far more restrictive in a Residential area. He thought we
should not put 4 x 8 in an ordinance, instead put the square footage.
He was sympathetic to someone who has a long name. This group needs to
watch out for their legal obligation to the community. If you have not
dotted all you "I" and crossed all your "T" in this program and they
can prove a hardship with the ordinance as it is drawn up if it causes
them to go out of business or causes a hardship in their business, you
may have a legal complication. Generally speaking in a Residential
area you can be quite restrictive because of the residential area it is
in.
The National Electric Sign Association, called N.E.S.A. have draft
model sign ordinances for communities across the United States, these
are far more informational than the Uniform Sign Code and more detail.
(he gave the board a copy) He said their company has a man that does
this through out the United States and would be happy to bring him in
and involve him. (he also gave out some literature) Their company
work with cities through out the Western States. He felt that a sign
code needs to be carefully considered. In Pocatello they did an
ordinance and had to change it because it was too restrictive requiring
this design review every time someone came in for a permit, because
everything was an exception to the rule. The two biggest factors will
',, • be square footage, height, zoning and materials. The signs that you
have you are stuck with. You don't want to give existing signs an
unfair advantage to new one. If you went with 4 x 8, 32 square foot,
~ ~~,
is a small sign for an apartment complex and would drive you crazy with •
exceptions. Jerry felt that the Uniform Sign Code is a good start but
not enough teeth. Pocatello tried to restrict the size to frontage
feet. There is a responsibility of the developer to research out what
the property is zoned and if it is zoned residential the sign will need
to be according to the zone. If they knew up front they only had 32
square feet, they would be creative with that 32 square feet.
John M. asked him if in commercial areas is there a typical limitation
on size and height? Jerry said it varies with the community.
Pocatello has 30 feet high restriction and anything beyond that
requires the design review. Awnings- It is a difficult thing. The
life on those isn't good for more than 5 to 10 years. John said we
have said in essence said they can't go on the city right-a-way.
Discussion on bill boards and signs on freeways. Mr Steadman will get
us a copy of the Pocatello Ordinance.
•
•
~ ~,U
~•
Planning & Zoning Regular Meeting
7:00 P. M. ~
t
* ~ s~ ~
John called the meeting to order. `~,~``~~ ~ ~~
A motion was made by Jerry Jeppesen and seconded by Mary Ann Mounts to
approve the minutes of 11/30/94. All Aye
RE: PUBLIC HEARING DATE SET FOR CONDITIONAL U5E PERMIT FOR THE RICKS
COLLEGE RELIGION BUILDING
TOPIC: (300,126,,,C.U.P.,RICKS COLLEGE,RELIGION BUILDING,PARKING)
Request far a Conditional Use Permit for the Ricks College Religion
Building. John Watson and Davawn Beattie declared a conflict of
interest. John had previously presented a preliminary site plan and it
was discussed in detail the storm drainage issues and fire hydrants.
John W. had had some drawings for the fire department and got their
blessing. He had submitted calculations illustrating on how a
detention facility would function and would work. All of this was done
total independent of the hearings for closing Viking Drive. In the
minutes John had ask, "if the only thing left to do was to submit the
final site plan"? The college then elected to move the location of the
• building and John then took it upon himself to come in because of the
changes on the plan. The changes were location, storm drainage and he
presented the plan and made the statement that he had been in
previously for a Conditional Use Permit and it was granted." There is
no one within 300 feet of this building except Ricks College. Maybe
that is where we dropped the ball, thinking that there really wasn't a
necessity for a formal hearing. John Watson said he was surprised to
find in the minutes he had stated in a meeting a Conditional Use Permit
was issued and was embarrassed that we had not held the legal hearing.
Ricks College is willing to run through the hoops. His question is it
a necessity to do that from a legal point of view? Jerry said if he
remembered right when John first brought it to us, he said he was doing
it as a courtesy. John Millar said in our ordinance it would require a
Conditional Use Permit and we have researched and cannot find where a
Legal Hearing was held.
John Watson discussed the seating and parking and the analysis he had
previously given for parking. He felt the parking was granted in the
meeting in December. He discussed that the Administration Building was
not going to be built now, but probably should be in on the calculation
of parking with this building. The only thing that has changed now is
the seating capacity is 2000 instead of 1100. The parking will need to
be increased.
Joe stated that the 275 parking places John Watson have originally
presented was for 1100 seats and now for 2000 seat area divided by 4 it
', • is 500. What parking spaces are eliminated, the Planning Board would
need to check to see if those parking places should be replaced. He
fan
~' felt that if something is there and eliminated, it should be replaced •
as part of the new development.
Davawn asked to make a statement, not as Planning & Zoning but as an
employee of Ricks College that deals with parking. They have
identified about 750 spaces that adjoin this unit, the one across at
the woman residence and one west of Manwaring Center. They are not
used during Sunday service and should be looked at for joint use. John
Watson feels that the college should be the one to say this is what we
think and if a hearing is set that is the place they need to come and
say this is where they think we should be on parking. Mary Ann and
John Millar said this is dictated by the ordinance and has to meet with
this Board's approval. Mary Ann said Davawn makes a good point, that
their maximum capacity would not be utilized except on Sunday, when
their other parking is not utilized.
John Watson stated that he had been super sensitive that he had
presented everything to this group in accordance to the ordinance. An
important part of the calculation for parking was based on the concept
and he did not think that should change, by bringing in the closing of
Viking Drive in the future and bringing in the building of the
Administration Building if and when it surfaces. John Millar stated
that possibly a Master Plan should be presented. He said as he
remembered the comment that was made with regard to the parking loss on
Viking Drive, is "Maybe this is a good time to make that up right now
rather than try to add 30 states later on".
Davawn read out of the Zoning Book "Joint Use Parking". (discussion)
John Millar stated the college needs to know that we are not trying to
obstruct the building or make it difficult. He stated that somehow we
did not put this through a Public Hearing. The language was in the
minutes, but was not done officially. Possibly this group was in error
rather than John Watson's for not going to Public Hearing.
John Watson suggested that the College and Joe sit down together and
develope a parking plan. John .Millar stated that this group would
consider the shared use.
John Watson asked Rose to research the hospital expansion, to see if
everything has been done necessary. They plan to enlarge with doctors
offices and an administration wing.
A motion was made by Mary Ann Mounts and seconded by Jim Long that we
proceed to Public Hearing for a Conditional Use Permit for the Religion
Building on January 11. All Aye
RE: IMPACT ZONE - MOTION PASSED TO CHANGE BOUNDARIES ON POLE LINE
ROAD; SUBDIVISIONS DISCUSSED
TOPIC: (300,127,,,IMPACT ZONE,SUBDIVISIONS,REVERSE FRONTAGE,ARTERIALS,
COLLECTORS)
Discussion on the Impact Zone public hearing. There will be a public •
hearing on January 5 and one for the County Commissioners and City
Council on January 25. The plan is to conduct it the same as we did at
~~~
~• the last hearing and keep control of the meeting and ask Richard Smith
to chair the hearings.
Jerry if people come to the hearings and ask to be in the Impact Zone,
will we have to have another set of hearings? John Millar said no if
we do it at the hearing and tell them this is the new boundary.
A motion was made by Jerry Jeppesen that the quarter mile be changed
for the Impact Zone boundary to 200 feet South of the Pole Line road.
Seconded by John Watson. All Aye.
Discussion on the Business Park and the Revolving Loan Fund.
John Millar thanked Jerry Jeppesen for all the help he had given this
board on the Impact Zone while he had served on this board.
Richard Smith arrived at the end of the meeting. He had two concerns.
If the sub division ordinance applies throughout the county in all
zones, what triggers a sub division plat? John Millar explained if you
break any parcel into five parcels of less than five acres each, they
have to file a plat. The city requires if you break any parcel into
three parcels you will subdivide.
Brad questioned if you sell one acre lots, it can be Rural Residential,
but when do you have to plat it? John and Richard explained.
Discussion reverse frontage. It is a concern with the commissioners.
•
Richard said it was his understanding the intent was access.
Discussion. John Millar stated what it is trying to encourage the guy
that has 10 acres and wants to break it up in lots, to put a lane down
through it. Richard stated the commissioners were concerned about if
we are trying to stop on street parking? He had told them our concern
is access. Joe discussed, if you don't restrict parking you will
restrict the traffic lanes.
Jerry said one thing the commissioners are concerned about was out on
Barney Dairy Road cars are parked along there to watch the ball games.
John Millar suggested that access should not be allowed along the back
lot lines and only on indicated streets.
A motion was made by Richard Smith that we include in the ordinance the
language addressing limited primary access to homes on arterials,
connectors, and collectors. And secondly address the issue of access to
the rear of the lot to arterials, connectors, and collectors not be
allowed. Seconded by Davawn Beattie that we make that modification.
All Aye.
Meeting Adjourned.
r ~
U