09241990 Regular Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

3 Regular Meeting September 24, 1990 Page 3 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS, TEXAS, AMENDING APPENDIX B OF THE SAN MARCOS CODE OF ORDINANCES PERTAINING TO THE REGULATION OF SIGNS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; REPEALING ALL CONFLICTING ORDINANCES; PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES; PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Ms. Kissler moved for approval of the Ordinance on second reading and Mr. Hernandez seconded the motion. Mark provided the Council with simplified language of a portion of the Ordinance regarding temporary signs. The Council discussed if Sections 1-9(b) and 2-3 are in conflict. Mr. Taylor advised Section 2-3 applies to only one particular type sign and would govern over Section 1-9(b) because it is more restrictive. Mr. Taylor advised Section 2-4(3) would be an exception to Section 1-9(b), and that these sections could be written more clearly. Mr. Guerra asked what good is served regulating the Kodak sign (3 sides). Ms. Martinez responded it is what the current Ordinance allows (now limited to 2 sides), but the Council can change the square footage or number of faces allowed on signs (Page 15 - [29]). Jeff Hill expressed concern regarding Section 2-2(2), and these are recommendations from SMEU for safety. Mayor Morris stated the height needs to be clarified, and Mr. Taylor will check on this matter. The Council asked if LBJ and Guadalupe were recommended for inclusion in Section 2-3(4) (B). Mr. Taylor stated the Committee did not recommend LBJ and Guadalupe; Mr. John Diaz stated they were dropped during the process; and Mr. Aart Millecam stated he thinks the Committee did include LBJ and Guadalupe. Mr. Hill requested clarification as follows: Section 2-2(5) is an identification sign with a limitation what can be on the sign, and Page 14 (13) stated the name of the business only can be on the sign. Mr. Taylor stated he could bring language to allow tenants to put their names and logos on the signs. The Council discussed Section 2-3(6) and (7) regarding the aggregate total (Mr. Plummer present at 9:05 p.m.). Mr. Taylor stated if (6) and (7) are deleted, it will allow more signs, and some other area of measurement would need to be added. Mr. Taylor stated he could offer the Council new language for (6) and (7), and if the Ordinance provides space requirements, Staff will need to check on the impact that will occur. Mr. Gunnarson stated he acquired state permits for four stick signs to be changed to monopoles prior to the adoption of the Sign Ordinance, and he wants to know if the new Ordinance will allow him to utilize his permits. Mr. Taylor stated the Ordinance will allow Mr. Gunnarson to replace his four signs with monopoles. The Council directed the addition of wording to address Mr. Gunnarson's permits. Jane Hughson stated she wants a step added to the appeals' process before the Planning or Zoning Commission, then the appeal to ZBOA. Council directed that provision be made, with Mr. Gilley determining which Commission would be more appropriate to use. Mr. Moore stated he wants the Planning Commission to review signage in their thoroughfare review annually. Mr. Taylor stated the two-step process must be meaningful, with the Board needing specific criteria. The Council wants to try the two-step process with specific criteria. The Council reviewed a memorandum prepared by Mr. Taylor with drafted language. Jane Hughson requested more time be allowed in Section 2-4(1), and the Council directed Staff recommend new time limitations for temporary signs. The Council directed Mr. Taylor provide changed wording of a simplified Ordinance at third reading. Mr. Taylor will bring the Ordinance back to the Council in four to six weeks for third reading and will provide copies of the proposed changes to interested parties. Nina Pryatel stated the signs in our City are not attractive. Mayor Morris stated she wants the Ordinance to cover the ETJ, and the Council expressed interest in controlling the ETJ to some degree on state-funded roads. The Council voted unanimously for approval of the Ordinance on second reading. Mayor Morris introduced for consideration adoption of a Resolution, the caption which was read as follows: