Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-07-16 Business and Economic Development Committee Minutes BUSINESS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Monday, July 16, 2012, 5 p.m. City Council Chambers Minutes Councilors: Weston, Durgin, Gallant, Longo, Blanchette, Hawes, Baldacci and Sprague Staff: Norm Heitmann, David Gould, Jeff Wallace, Jeremy Martin . CONSENT AGENDA 1. Community Development Residential Rehabilitation Loan – 15 E Street (Confidential Memo provided separately). th 2. Community Development Residential Rehabilitation Loan - 64 15 Street (Confidential Memo provided separately). Councilor Longo moved to accept Staff’s recommendation and approve the Consent Agenda. The motion was seconded by Councilor Durgin. The motion passed unanimously. REGULAR AGENDA 3. Amendment to Planning Division Processing Fee Schedule. (See attached Council Order). David Gould explained that this is a proposal to make two changes to the Planning Division Processing Fee Schedule. The first is to establish a specific fee for “flag lots.” The second change is to clarify that fees charged for Stormwater Reviews that are not part of Site Location of Development Act delegated authority review. Councilor Durgin moved to accept Staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Councilor Longo. The motion passed unanimously. 4. Discussion regarding electronic signs. Councilor Weston indicated that he asked for a discussion on this as there is a business that is proposing to lease a building on Main Street that wishes to install an electronic sign. Because it is ordinance restricted, they cannot install this type of sign. Jeremy Martin gave a history regarding the last revision to the sign ordinance which allows electronic signs in four zones: General Commercial & Service District, Shopping & Personal Service District, Industry & Service District and Government & Institutional Service District. He indicated that he has been approached by a civic entity that wishes to replace an existing sign with an electronic sign. 2 Rather than review the entire Sign Ordinance at this time which could entail many meetings and a great deal of time, it was felt that in order to accommodate this request, an amendment to include non-profit civic organizations would expedite this. Mr. Martin indicated that there needs to be an in-depth review of the entire Sign Ordinance in light of the request for an electronic sign on Main Street. The proposed amendment would limit an electronic sign to: 50 feet from a residence; no change for at least 20 minutes and not be changed after dark. Councilors discussed reviewing the entire ordinance as opposed to reviewing the proposal before them. Mr. Ed Armstrong, Chair of Snowman Group, indicated that he is a member of the Elks Club. They wish to replace their existing sign with a new static electronic sign. Presently they have to physically go out and replace messages by hand. A new sign would allow them to do this from inside the building. They would like to be able to replace this sign before winter. Councilor Hawes indicated that the existing Sign Ordinance needs to be reviewed. Because it could take weeks or months to review the entire Sign Ordinance as it did the last time the Sign Ordinance was reviewed, she suggested that the item be put on the agenda and that a workshop be scheduled later. Councilor Weston indicated that he would be against this amendment as it only deals with the request for the civic organization and not for any businesses. Councilor Durgin indicated that he felt that the Elks Club should be able to replace their sign and moved to honor their request and forward this amendment on to agenda for approval of this action. The motion was seconded. Mr. Heitmann indicated that the City does not make ordinance changes for any one particular business. In this instance, non profits are rather unique compared to other places that need signs. They generally do not need signs with pictures, or ones that change rapidly and they don’t generally relate to zoning. Electronic signs pertain to zoning. When it comes to businesses, zoning may not be the best way to allow for them. The entire Sign Ordinance needs to be looked at to see what is best for all. Councilor Durgin moved to amend his motion to have a first draft of an ordinance amendment on the agenda regarding non profits and electronic signs. The motion was seconded. Councilors indicated that they felt that the same treatment should be made for everyone and that the Sign Ordinance needed to be looked at in its entirety. Councilors also discussed other amendment options. Chair Gratwick called for a vote. The Committee voted 2 in favor and 3 opposed. Therefore, the motion failed. After more discussion as to the process for moving this issue forward, Councilor Longo moved to direct staff to prepare an amendment to apply the same standards as those proposed by Jeremy Martin’s amendment for non profits to the Urban Service District (50’ setback from a residential property, no changes after dark and that the duration must be at least 20 minutes.) city-wide, and send the proposal on to the City Council for consideration. The motion was seconded and it passed by a vote of 4 in favor and 1 opposed. The meeting was adjourned by Chair Gratwick. 3