Laserfiche WebLink
Planning & Zoning Board <br />March 12, 2008 <br />Page 2 <br />Jeff Smyser, City Planner, presented the staff report. Mr. Smyser pointed out the <br />revisions that were made to the draft ordinance since the last meeting. <br />Mr. Smyser discussed with board members the options for limiting the frequency of text <br />change on a dynamic display sign. Board members stated concern that changing signs <br />may be a distraction to drivers. <br />Chair Tralle asked if there is any urgency to amending the sign ordinance at this time. <br />Mr. Smyser stated that there is a chance that permit applications could be submitted for <br />the existing billboards in the city once the moratorium is lifted. <br />Board members agreed to the removal of a specific time limit for message changes on <br />small dynamic display signs that would be allowed by the ordinance. <br />Mr. Nelson made a MOTION to recommend approval of the proposed amendment to the <br />Sign Ordinance subject to the removal of a section of text on page 21, X, stating "A sign <br />with a dynamic display area of less than twenty (20) square feet..." including i. and ii.. <br />Motion was supported by Mr. Root. Motion carried 6 - 0. <br />No one was present to speak at the Public Hearing. Mr. Rafferty made a MOTION to <br />close the Public Hearing at 7:23 p.m. Motion was supported by Mr. Pogalz. Motion <br />carried 6 -0. <br />VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS <br />A. Comp Plan Update — Joint Mtg. <br />Mr. Smyser provided a summary of the joint meeting on February 20. Staff found the <br />meeting to be a useful discussion. Mr. Smyser stated that the panel supported <br />managing growth with mapped staging areas as well as procedures and criteria for <br />allowing development to occur in a new staging area. Mr. Root noted that the panel <br />wants the means of implementation to be better defined. Mr. Smyser agreed and <br />explained that some possible methods were distributed to the panel. For example, <br />crossing a border into a new 10 -year staging area would require a city council review <br />and vote to ensure the new area was needed and that infrastructure is adequate to <br />support it. If opening the new area is consistent with the staging plan sequencing, this <br />would not require a comprehensive plan amendment. However, allowing <br />development in an area that is not consistent with the staging plan would require <br />amending the comprehensive plan. These are just examples of implementation <br />methods under consideration for managing growth. <br />VII. ADJOURNMENT <br />Mr. Rafferty made a MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 7:39 p.m. Motion was <br />supported by Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 6 -0. <br />DRAFT MINUTES <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />