05/23/1991 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE SIGN ORDINANCE STUDY COMMITTEE May 23, 1991 The Sign Ordinance Study Committee met in special session, Thursday, May 23, 1991, 5:30 P. M., City Council Chamber, City Hall, Paris, Texas. Chairman Jim Bell called the meeting to order with the following members present, Councilman Billy Joe Burnett, and Councilwoman Millie Ingram. Also present was City Manager, Michael E. Malone, and City Clerk, Mattie Cunningham Chairman Bell announced the purpose of the meeting was discussion of Chapter 28, Signs and Billboards, of the Code of Ordinances. Chairman Bell asked if there was any comments from the public, there being none, declared that portion of the meeting closed. Chairman Bell called for discussion on Chapter 28, Signs and Billboards. Councilman Burnett said he was concerned with doing away with the grandfather clause on sign that are already in place, and pointed out Section 28.21, Removal of Nonconforming Signs. Joe McCollum, Director of Community Development, address this issue, stating that he felt that this was done in order to get signs out of the streets, and to keep other from being erected in right -of -ways. Chairman Bell discussed Section 28.8, Location and Heights of Signs, and said that if you take in conjunction with what section Mr. McCollum spoke in regard to, effective July 1, 1991, all these signs that are nonconforming will have to become conforming, and in many cases the signs are just hanging over the right -of -way, they will have to be move as little as two feet, which will be a waste of money for the merchants. Chairman Bell told the Committee that he felt that consideration should be given to grandfathering all existing signs. Mr. McCollum told the Committee that he had been enforcing this ordinance since 1986, and that he had made a survey of nonconforming signs and notified the owners that they were nonconforming, telling them why, and told them that in their planning, they would have to correct the placement of their signs by July 1991. McCollum also told the Committee that any signs that have been erected since the ordinance was passed, had to meet the requirements of the sign ordinance. City Manager Malone raised the question of if the City has to take right -of -way, would the City have to pay to have the signs removed? Mr. McCollum advised that he would think the City would have to bear the cost legally if the sign was conforming to the sign ordinance requirements. City Manager Malone read Section 28.16 (e), and asked if a person had a sign that was nonconforming, and we did away with this portion of the