Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003.0408.TCWSSM.Minutes TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL & WORK STUDY SESSION OF THE FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL APRIL 8,2003 L Mayor Jon Beydler convened the Special Session at 5:10 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present for roll call were the following members of the Fountain Hills Town Council: Mayor Jon Beydler, Vice Mayor Ralphe, Councilpersons Mike Archambault, Leesa Stevens, Kathleen Nicola and John Kavanagh. Also present were Town Manager Tim Pickering, Town Attorney Andrew McGuire,Director of Public Works Tom Ward, Planner Denise Ruhling and Town Clerk Bev Bender. Councilman Melendez was absent. AGENDA ITEM #1 - PURSUANT TO A.R.S. 38-431.03A.4, VOTE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR: DISCUSSION OR CONSULTATION WITH THE ATTORNEYS OF THE PUBLIC BODY IN ORDER TO CONSIDER ITS POSITION AND INSTRUCT ITS ATTORNEYS REGARDING THE PUBLIC BODY'S POSITION REGARDING CONTRACTS THAT ARE THE SUBJECT OF NEGOTIATIONS, IN PENDING OR CONTEMPLATED LITIGATION OR IN SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS CONDUCTED IN ORDER TO AVOID OR RESOLVE LITIGATIONS (SPECIFICALLY, THE TOWN HALL LEASE). Councilwoman Stevens MOVED to convene the Executive Session and Councilman Archambault SECONDED the motion,which CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY by those present. AGENDA ITEM#2-RETURN TO SPECIAL SESSION Mayor Beydler reconvened the Special Session at 6:00 p.m. (Note: Councilman Kavanagh left the meeting at 6:45 p.m.) AGENDA ITEM#3 - DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED UPDATES TO ARTICLE 6 OF THE TOWN OF law FOUNTAIN HILLS ZONING ORDINANCE (SIGN ORDINANCE). Town Manager Tim Pickering stated that the purpose of this evening's meeting was to review Sign Ordinance changes and focus primarily on those main areas. Senior Planner Denise Ruhling provided a brief overview of the proposed significant changes to the Sign Ordinance. She explained that the proposed changes came about as the result of continued difficulties that were encountered in finding enough square footage of signage for multi-tenanted businesses and corner buildings especially. Ms. Ruhling briefly outlined the significant changes to the Sign Ordinance as follows: * Awnings/Canopy Signs: Currently the ordinance does not specifically allow awning signs. The proposed changes would allow awnings with a maximum of six (6) square feet of sign area. * Banners: Currently banners are allowed one time ever for a business location. The proposed change would allow banners for up to 28 days per year(each display counts as seven days but must not exceed 28 days). The current ordinance also requires that a banner be 4'X 8'. The proposed ordinance allows up to 32 square feet in whatever shape the applicant prefers. An application and permit are still required. * Corner Building Total Aggregate: Currently the ordinance states that only the portion of the building with the main entrance counts toward the total aggregate sign area allowed. The proposed change would allow up to two public street frontages to count toward the total aggregate sign area. * Neon: Currently neon was not allowed, the proposed ordinance would allow neon as part of a wall sign and allow four(4)feet of neon signage in the window(i.e. OPEN). E:\BBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2003\Work Study Session 4-08-03.doc Page 1 of 4 * Secondary Entrance Signage: The current ordinance does not take into consideration businesses with secondary entrances ( i.e. common area, parking lot or dual street frontage). The proposed change would allow businesses with a second general public entrance 25% of their total aggregate sign area, in addition to their total aggregate sign area, as a wall sign to be installed as a secondary sign not visible from the main public entrance in the C-2, C-3, and TCC zoning districts. * Under Canopy Signs: The proposed ordinance will allow Under Canopy Signs as a part of Comprehensive Sign Plans. * Window Decorations/Painting: The proposed change would specifically allow businesses the opportunity to decorate/paint their windows for civic,patriotic or religious holidays. * A-Frame Signs: A-Frame Signs will not be allowed. after January 1, 2004, under the proposed ordinance guidelines. However, Open House directional signs will be allowed to direct the public to properties for sale, lease or rent. Ms. Ruhling also discussed the input that was received from citizens as a result of the public hearings that were held regarding this issue. She noted that the members of the Planning and Zoning Commission had reviewed the proposed changes to the Sign Ordinance and unanimously recommended approval. She pointed out that staff originally recommended that A-frame signs be prohibited upon approval of the Sign Ordinance updates, however, the Planning and Zoning Commission, in an effort to provide businesses additional time to compensate for this loss, stipulated that they not be allowed after January 1, 2004. Ms. Ruhling added that Staff also recommended approval and requested that the Town Council support their recommendations and vote to approve the changes as outlined. She noted that the proposed changes were positive ones for the business community. Councilwoman Nicola commented on the delays that had occurred in reviewing and approving changes to the Sign Ordinance and questioned whether the prohibition on A-frame signs should be extended from January 1, 2004 to July 1, 2004 in order to allow the one-year notice that the Planning and Zoning Commission had originally intended to provide businesses. Mr. Pickering recommended that this issue be brought up when the item was considered at a future Council Meeting. He stated the opinion that there would be no problem with extending that timeframe and agreed that the Planning and Zoning Commission's intent was to give businesses adequate time. He agreed that the matter had "dragged on" and an extension would be appropriate. Discussion ensued among the members of the Council relative to garage sale signs and the Town Manager's intention to research this matter, the fact that garage sale signs were included in the Sign Ordinance on Page 20, and the fact that they were considered "portable signs," because they are temporary and not attached to a permanent structure, and the fact that staff encourages industrial multi-tenants to use the comprehensive sign process. In response to a question from Vice Mayor Ralphe as to whether the prohibition of A-frame signs (while allowing open house directional signs to remain in use) was discriminatory, Town Attorney Andrew McGuire responded that this issue may in fact be challenged in the future but noted that other communities had adopted similar regulations and had similar restrictions in place. Mayor Beydler expressed concerns relative to this matter and said that he believed rules should be "universally applied." Additional discussion ensued relative to enforcement issues, a suggestion that garage sale signs only be allowed on two weekends per year, the fact that banners were an issue of concern despite the fact that they required an administrative permit and the cost for that permit was $25.00, a suggestion that A-frame signs be allowed on a permit/fee basis as well, the fact that there were so many banners and that there would be so E:\BBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2003\Work Study Session 4-08-03.doc Page 2 of 4 many A-frame signs if they were allowed on a permit basis that enforcement would become extremely difficult, and the fact that four community meetings were held to discuss the proposed Sign Ordinance changes as well as two meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission. (Councilman Kavanagh left the meeting at 6:45 p.m.) Mayor Beydler expressed concern relative to the number of banners that were displayed throughout the Town. He asked why the Town Manager was supporting the elimination of A-frames but was allowing the extended use of banners,which would basically replace the problems caused by the A-frames. Mr. Pickering responded that the proposal relative to banners was recommended by previous management and said that he agreed that the banners were going to create problems and would negatively impact the overall aesthetics of the Town. He said he would be happy to remove the banner component from the recommendations when this issue was presented to the Council for consideration at a Regular Council Meeting. Additional discussion ensued relative to the fact that three (3) code enforcement officers would typically work 8 to 5,Monday through Friday, an estimate that was arrived at as a result of the amount of time the Marshall's Department spent on code enforcement issues, the fact that discussions had not occurred relative to actual staffing needs in this area and the number might be reduced to two (2) officers depending on the results of those discussions, and weekend code enforcement requirements. In response to a question from Councilwoman Stevens regarding Council input Mr. Pickering stated that staff intended to present the ordinance as presented by staff except for banner changes for Council review and consideration. He added that staff would then act upon the Council's input and direction and an additional draft would then be presented to the Council for discussion and action at another meeting. He said that he would draft up alternative language relative to the banner issue based on the Mayor's comments and his personal belief that they would negatively impact the Town. Ms. Ruhling advised that a large amount of varying comments were received from the business community upon hearing that A-frame signs would be eliminated. She said that staff did discuss the possibility of utilizing business district type signage but noted that in the beginning the owners' response to this suggestion was not well received. She commented that the business owners wanted the Town to provide them with land and signs to advertise their businesses. She said that they wanted the Town to tell them how they were going to be able to replace their A-frame signs. Discussion ensued relative to the fact that peddler's licenses are required in order to place flyers on cars and permit/enforcement issues, contractor's signs and the fact that regulations governing them had not been changed this time around, menu boards and the fact that they could not be visible from any public street or alley and must be blocked from any residential zoned district,the fact that any businesses that were legal at the time of the adoption of the ordinance would be "grandfathered-in" unless they changed their signs and then they would be required to come into compliance with the new regulations, signage issues associated with the Target store and the Comprehensive Sign Plan, the fact that Special Event banners must be removed within 24 hours following events, and the fact that the Town had the ability to "over-ride the ordinance" and have signs up earlier and longer than typically allowed. Mr. Pickering commented that the Town did not allow businesses to place banners on light poles but did use the light poles for Town-related event banners. He added that banners could be placed throughout the Town in the Town's right-of-way. Councilwoman Stevens said that she had received a request that the Shea signage as it related to open house signage be re-addressed. Ikar Public Works Director Tom Ward stated that staff was hesitant to re-address signage on Shea Boulevard and added that they did not believe a need existed to do so. He also expressed concerns relative to setting a precedent and said that once one exception to the Code was allowed,many others would follow. E:\BBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2003\Work Study Session 4-08-03.doc Page 3 of 4 Mr. Pickering commented that Shea Boulevard was Fountain Hills' "front door" and urged that caution be exercised in making any changes that might negatively impact the Town's overall appearance. L,. Mr. Pickering summarized that the issues that staff was going to look at as a result of discussions included garage sale signs and the enforcement of leaflet permits. He added that he would craft a recommendation relative to banners and would look into the possibility of having code enforcement officers work on the weekends. Ms. Ruhling added that staff would also look at minimizing size requirements for signs and stipulating that open house signs must be professionally made. She emphasized that even after the Sign Ordinance changes had been adopted, should the Council decide that they would like to change portions of it, a text amendment could always be done. Councilwoman Nicola also requested that staff pursue changing the date for the elimination of the A-frame signs to July 1, 2004 rather than January 1, 2004, as previously discussed. Mr. Pickering indicated his intention to follow up on this matter as well. AGENDA ITEM#4- ESTABLISH NEXT MEETING DATE AND ADJOURNMENT. Mr. Pickering stated that the date of the next Work Study Session would be May 6, 2003, from 6:00 to 7:30 p.m. He said that Council policies and procedures would be discussed at that time. Mr. McGuire indicated his intention to provide the Council with information on the topics that would be discussed, including a cover memo, by April 25th so that the Council would have an opportunity to review the materials well in advance of the meeting. Councilwoman Stevens MOVED that the Council adjourn and Councilman Archambault SECONDED the motion which CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY by those present. The meeting adjourned at 7:26 p.m. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS By: r/ Oa �, y_ Jo :eydler Mayo ATTEST: Bev Bender,Town Clerk PREPARED BY: /'! , _- .,' • Bev Bender,Town Clerk CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Work Study Meeting held by the Town Council of Fountain hills on the 8th day of April 2003. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and that a quorum was present. DATED this 15th day of May 2003. r Bev Bender,Town Clerk L E:\BBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2003\Work Study Session 4-08-03.doc Page 4 of 4