Laserfiche WebLink
EDA Chair Cords asked if the sign variance requests are somewhat consistent in manner or <br />whether they are drastically different from one request to another. He explained that his thought <br />was whether there is a formula that could be applied to the ordinance. <br /> <br />Planning Commission Chair Bauer stated that the Commission has attempted to remain consistent <br />in terms of allowed size and height. <br /> <br />Economic Development Manager Sullivan asked if there would be discussion on billboards. <br /> <br />Planning Commissioner Anderson referenced the upcoming Highway 10 project and stated that <br />the City will continue to receive requests for taller signs because the visibility will be impacted by <br />that project. He cautioned the City to think about where signs are placed, the height, and size. <br /> <br />Economic Development Manager Sullivan stated that staff is currently working towards putting <br />together a billboard and sign ordinance along with a lease agreement with iDigital for the billboard. <br />He stated that from a staff perspective he will speak in favor of a larger sign, as that is what <br />businesses continue to ask for, recognizing that the Planning Commission would favor a smaller <br />sign. He stated that when working on the lease agreement, there has been a question of whether <br />political advertising would be allowed. He explained that political advertising is not allowed on <br />City property, but in this instance a private company would be leasing the property. He noted that <br />there would not be adult content advertising allowed. <br /> <br />EDA Member MacLennan stated that the challenge to attracting businesses to The COR is the lack <br />of visibility, which is why a larger sign is needed. He stated that the purpose of the billboard is to <br />advertise for businesses and therefore he would support a larger sign only for the purpose of <br />business advertising and would not support political advertising. <br /> <br />Councilmember Musgrove stated that part of the messaging can include community events, which <br />may have political involvement and therefore there could be a gray area. <br /> <br />Economic Development Manager Sullivan stated that this private company will sell adds to pay <br />the lease and earn revenue. He asked whether this would be considered City land, which would <br />then not allow political advertising, or whether this would be considered private as it is land that <br />is being leased and therefore political ads could be purchased. <br /> <br />Councilmember Specht stated that he would prefer to leave it open for the company to decide. He <br />suggested that legal counsel be consulted to determine whether or not that would be considered <br />City property. <br /> <br />Planning Commissioner VanScoy stated that the ordinance is clear that if the City owns the land <br />that type of advertising is not allowed. <br /> <br />Economic Development Manager Sullivan stated that legal counsel was consulted and there is a <br />difference if the land is being leased. <br /> <br />City Council Special Work Session / September 23, 2021 <br />Page 3 of 11 <br /> <br />