Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />JANUARY 8, 1998 <br />premise sign. Montour felt that when Allen Avenue goes through the <br />entire picture changes, and the Eli Road signs would not be necessary. <br />Mr. Schletty recommended approval of the Conditional Use Permit <br />allowing temporary off - premise signs advertising model home open <br />houses in Pitrina Park Terrace on private property as requested by <br />Masterpiece Homes at the locations requested subject to permission being <br />obtained from the property owners involved; these signs to be allowed <br />during weekdays from 2 P.M. until 7 P.M. and during the weekends from <br />Friday evening through Sunday evening; with the signs at Eli <br />Road/Centerville Road and Eli Road/DeSoto Street to be allowed only <br />until Allen Avenue is improved through to Centerville Road. <br />Motion seconded by Barraclough. <br />Motion carried 6 —1. Keis opposed. <br />The City Planner reported that the applicant has also applied for a text <br />amendment that would allow for off - premise signs in the right -of -way <br />rather than limiting them to private property. <br />Schletty asked how other cities address realtor signs. The City Planner <br />suggested that other cities probably ignore open house signs placed in the <br />boulevard areas. The Planner suggested that technically if the City were <br />to allow open house signs in the right -of -way, it would have to allow off. - <br />premise signs in the right -of -way for any purpose, i.e. florists' signs, <br />boutiques, etc. The Planner indicated that the Commission must <br />determine what conditions are appropriate and try to make the amendment <br />as narrow as possible. <br />Keis indicated that he would not like people having the ability to place <br />whatever off - premise signs they desire in the boulevard area abutting his <br />lot. Keis felt that property owners should have to grant permission even if <br />these signs are in the right -of -way. <br />Schletty stated that he could support the text amendment if a requirement <br />is that the abutting property owner must grant permission for the sign. <br />The Planner pointed out that a property owner abutting the public right -of- <br />way has no authority over that right -of -way and the City cannot give its <br />authority for this right -of -way to the property owner. <br />Keis pointed out that the text amendment amount to only moving the sign <br />out closer to the street. The Planner pointed out that a Conditional Use <br />Permit is currently required by place off- premise signs on private <br />property. Carson suggested that the CUP process be eliminated. <br />Page 33 <br />