Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19770222RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves HISTORICAL PRESERVATION COMMITTEE Regular Meeting February 22, 1977 A regular Meeting of the Historical Preservation Committee was held at 1:00 on February 22nd in the Council Chambers, City Hall. Those members present were Lary Groen, Norm Burns, Mona Frost, Florence Glidden, Jerry Michaels, Bob Marsh. Also present was Clayton Meyring, Building Inspector. APPROVAL OF MINUTES SIGN CODE AMENDMENTS Minutes of the February 8th meeting were reviewed. Groen made one correction at the bottom of page to add the word basement. With this correction Ms. Frost moved to approve the minutes, seconded by Burns. All in favor, motion carried. The members reviewed the suggested amendments made by Stanford in the Planning Office. The memo from the planning office listed five suggested amendments, and the members took each item: #1 - would require incandescent bulbs to be hidden. At this time the code does not allow any type of neon sign, and would simply add incandescent bulbs to this. Michaels stated that it is amazing how much light comes from even a 3½ watt bulb. The members discussed other methods that could be used to add brilliance to a bulb, such as in the Arcades building where mirrors are added behind the lights to intensify them. Mr. Meyring did not have any real problem with this amendment. #2 - would eliminate bonus for cut out letter signs. Under the current terms, a bonus is added for cut out signs. Meyring feels that this amendment would all but eliminate cut out signs.? The bonus is an additional 3" around the border on all sides of the sign. One example is the sign on the Miner's Building. The question of legality and enforcement were discussed- As it ~ ,,~w, w~ ~ ~-=.. ~ measured for size, you take the smallest geometric figure that will fit around the sign and measure that. If you do have a cut out sign, you cannot have any other material showing through behind it. It can be illuminated. The sign code regulations are based on amount of square foot frontage a building has. They can have a total of 20 sq. ft. for all signs, but no one sign larger than 10 sq. ft. Burns feels the code is not so much the problem as the enforcement of it. Theproblem of the buildings that exist with several businesses inside was discussed at length. The members are concerned that there would be an allowance for advertising the building itself, and then, the law being that each business has a right to advertise, there would be an additional allowan- cen for each business. One example is the Mine Company ~uit'~img where there are several business~inside that building, and each one has a sign outside. Marsh asked why there couldn't be one sign, with a list of businesses in each building. Or each business have a wall sign inside. 93 - would update to reflect zoning changes. Meyring does not feel it is too bad now. The members did not have any problem with this. #4 - would reduce size of allowed signs. Meyring has a lot of problem with this suggestion. Generally, most of the signs now are conforming. If you add this amendment many of them would no longer conform. This would cause problems. The suggested change would actually allow an additional two feet of sign. In the case where there is a building with at least 30 sq. ft. of frontage, they could have at least a 10 ft. sign advertising the building itself, then each business gets to have a sign. This brought up the question of interpertation of the code, and whether it could be read that way. This has not been adequately tried and enforced to know the exact interpertation. Burns feels that is even more reason to have the reg- ulations spelled out to eliminate any doubt. A two story building is allowed signage for the ground floor and the second story is treated as if it were ground floor level, and the same with the basement. So speaking the actual signage could be tripled. The fact that so many more buildings are buiIding second stories, and that so many business are going below grade or on second floors where they didn't do so two years ago shows that the intensity of the uses of the buildings is increasing. The tripling of the signage is a main concern of the members. The possibility of a Registry was further discussed. The the maximum sign area per business as opposed to buildings should be clarified. Also, the members feel a good look should be taken at the use of temporary signs, the time period for which they are allowed, and it should be enforced. The members then discussed the problem of graphic signs, such as the Eagle by the Galena Street East Restaurant. 95 - would includecut out signsin thel0 ft. maximum Meyring feels this is just continuing the previous, but would not give the bonus for cut out letters. Basically, the suggested amendment in 94 is the only major oneon which controversy has been raised. Meyring has a problem with the 3" suggestion on cut out signs, but felt that if the 3"border was deleted without taking away that 3" it would be acceptable. The members genera±±y felt the same way. They still have a deep concern for the frontage area allowance for signs, and the second and basement area included. SUMMARY 1. Building Registry with a small sign advertising each business. 2. Study the maximum sign area per business in relation to per property, considering the possibility of tripling the signs because of three floors. 3. Address the temporary signs and enforcement, and time limitations. 4. Passing on to Council the possibility of having Mahoney give Clayton Meyring a duty of once every four months or so, take one day to inspect the signs and changes. Marsh lodged a formal complaint against Don Giovanni's for putting temporary signs all over the mall advertising their special. Meyring stated that if they are adver- tising a buidling somewhere else then it is a violation. The possibility of having fines for violations to the sign code were discussed. But Groen does not feel it RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves HISTORICAL PRESERVATION COMMITTEE Regular Meeting February 22, 1977 OLD BUSINESS Rubey Park Bus Shelter NEW BUSINESS Antique lights Signs would solve the problem. Meyring stated that the code is already written that way, but in order to enforce you have to take them to court. It is easier if the offense is minor to work it out with them. If there is a case of a habitual offender, then court might be the solution. Groen stated that he had a discussion with Dwight Shellman and Shellman's request to Stanford to push through the enclosure of Rubey Park bus stop after the HPC turned it down. Shellman told him that they had originally planned to spend $12,000 on that project, but then came up with the $2,000 rip off. Groen related to Shellman the suggestion of the HPC to maintain the pavilion effect of that structure, and the suggestion of using some type of clear material of a non-breakable nature. The structure should be stained or painted in an attractive manner. Shellman stated he was in agreement with these feelings, and will have an architect work up more detailed drawings before they make another presentation. If Shellman wants to go with anything such as solar heating, the committee wants to see very detailed plans. Groen presented a color chip of the color that was originally approved for the antique lights. This color is no longer available, and Groen presented an alternative color, produced by Martin Senour called "Rawhide" and is available at Arka Abode Adornments. The lights were painted with interior paint, and the color has faded. Groen reviewed the plan for street signs to be put up in the mall area hanging on brackets off of the antique lights. The members would like to see the same type of signs on Main Street. On the next Agenda, the members tenure will be reviewed. The meeting adjourned at 3:00. Ellen L. Atkins, Deputy City Clerk