|
|
|
|
Agenda: |
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING |
|
Date: |
2/16/2010 |
| |
| |
|
| Item: |
1. Staff presentation and overview of Billboard Signs and discussion:" |
| |
|
| |
NO ACTION WAS TAKEN
STAFF PRESENTATION AND OVERVIEW OF BILLBOARD SIGNS AND DISCUSSION:
1A. CURRENT REGULATIONS
1B. PROJECT MILESTONES
1C. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT LEGISLATIVE REVIEW COMMITTEE (LRC) - RECOMMENDED ORDINANCE
1D. MAYOR'S RECOMMENDED ORDINANCE
1E. CITY COUNCIL POLICY DIRECTION OF AUGUST 26, 2009
1F. THIRD PARTY INVENTORY - FINDINGS
1G. CITY COUNCIL POLICY DIRECTION OF JANUARY 5, 2010
1H. PENDING ISSUES
[DEVELOPMENT SERVICES/PLANNING, MATHEW MCELROY, (915) 541-4056] |
| |
|
| Votes: |
|
|
| |
|
| Item: |
2. Discussion and action on policy direction for pending issues regarding Billboard Signs (Regular City Council Agenda)
|
| |
|
| |
2A. SHOULD NEW BILLBOARD CONSTRUCTION BE PROHIBITED OUTRIGHT OR PERMITTED WITH A CAP AND EXCHANGE PROVISION?
2B. IF NEW BILLBOARD CONSTRUCTION IS PERMITTED, WHAT IS THE RECOMMENDED MINIMUM EXCHANGE RATE?
2C. SHOULD AN EXCHANGE BE BASED ON SPECIFIC CORRIDORS OR LOCATIONS OR OTHER REQUIREMENTS?
ACTION TAKEN: TO ALLOW FOR CONTINUED EXCHANGE AND AMEND THE ORDINANCE WITH A 1:1 EXCHANGE AND A 2:1 EXCHANGE RATE IN THE FIVE BRT CORRIDORS.
SHOULD NEW BILLBOARD CONSTRUCTION BE PROHIBITED OUTRIGHT OR PERMITTED WITH A CAP AND EXCHANGE PROVISION?
[DEVELOPMENT SERVICES/PLANNING, MATHEW MCELROY, (915) 541-4056] |
| |
|
| Votes: |
|
DISTRICT |
OFFICIAL |
VOTE |
|
1
|
Rep. Lilly |
NO
|
|
2
|
Rep. Byrd |
NO
|
|
3
|
Rep. Acosta |
YES
|
|
4
|
Rep. Robinson |
YES
|
|
5
|
Rep. Quintana |
YES
|
|
6
|
Rep. Holguin |
YES
|
|
7
|
Rep. S. Ortega |
NO
|
|
8
|
Rep. O'Rourke |
NO
|
|
-
|
Mayor Cook |
YES (TIE BREAKER)
|
|
|
| |
|
| Item: |
2D. DISCUSSION AND ACTION: On a cap and exchange provision, how is the takedown to be measured (structure, square footage, or other)?" |
| |
|
| |
ACTION TAKEN: TO MAINTAIN THE STATUS QUO AND MEASURE TAKEDOWNS BY STRUCTURE.
ON A CAP AND EXCHANGE PROVISION, HOW IS THE TAKEDOWN TO BE MEASURED (STRUCTURE, SQUARE FOOTAGE, OR OTHER)?
[DEVELOPMENT SERVICES/PLANNING, MATHEW MCELROY, (915) 541-4056] |
| |
|
| Votes: |
|
DISTRICT |
OFFICIAL |
VOTE |
|
1
|
Rep. Lilly |
YES
|
|
2
|
Rep. Byrd |
YES
|
|
3
|
Rep. Acosta |
YES
|
|
4
|
Rep. Robinson |
YES
|
|
5
|
Rep. Quintana |
YES
|
|
6
|
Rep. Holguin |
YES
|
|
7
|
Rep. S. Ortega |
YES
|
|
8
|
Rep. O'Rourke |
YES
|
|
-
|
Mayor Cook |
DID NOT VOTE
|
|
|
| |
|
| Item: |
2E. DISCUSSION AND ACTION: What should the registration procedures be for existing billboard signs within the City limits and the extended territorial jurisdiction (ETJ) to establish legal non-conformancy?" |
| |
|
| |
ACTION TAKEN: TO MAINTAIN THE STATUS QUO ON THE REGISTRATION PROCEDURES FOR EXISTING BILLBOARD SIGNS WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS AND THE EXTENDED TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION (ETJ) TO ESTABLISH LEGAL NON - CONFORMANCY.
WHAT SHOULD THE REGISTRATION PROCEDURES BE FOR EXISTING BILLBOARD SIGNS WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS AND THE EXTENDED TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION (ETJ) TO ESTABLISH LEGAL NON-CONFORMANCY?
[DEVELOPMENT SERVICES/PLANNING, MATHEW MCELROY, (915) 541-4056] |
| |
|
| Votes: |
|
DISTRICT |
OFFICIAL |
VOTE |
|
1
|
Rep. Lilly |
YES
|
|
2
|
Rep. Byrd |
YES
|
|
3
|
Rep. Acosta |
YES
|
|
4
|
Rep. Robinson |
YES
|
|
5
|
Rep. Quintana |
YES
|
|
6
|
Rep. Holguin |
YES
|
|
7
|
Rep. S. Ortega |
YES
|
|
8
|
Rep. O'Rourke |
YES
|
|
-
|
Mayor Cook |
DID NOT VOTE
|
|
|
| |
|
| Item: |
2F. DISCUSSION AND ACTION: What is the recommended minimum setback requirement for billboard signs adjacent to residential districts?" |
| |
|
| |
ACTION TAKEN: TO MAINTAIN THE STATUS QUO AND MAKE NO CHANGES TO THE SETBACK REQUIREMENT FOR BILLBOARD SIGNS ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.
WHAT IS THE RECOMMENDED MINIMUM SETBACK REQUIREMENT FOR BILLBOARD SIGNS ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS?
[DEVELOPMENT SERVICES/PLANNING, MATHEW MCELROY, (915) 541-4056] |
| |
|
| Votes: |
|
DISTRICT |
OFFICIAL |
VOTE |
|
1
|
Rep. Lilly |
YES
|
|
2
|
Rep. Byrd |
NO
|
|
3
|
Rep. Acosta |
YES
|
|
4
|
Rep. Robinson |
YES
|
|
5
|
Rep. Quintana |
YES
|
|
6
|
Rep. Holguin |
YES
|
|
7
|
Rep. S. Ortega |
YES
|
|
8
|
Rep. O'Rourke |
YES
|
|
-
|
Mayor Cook |
DID NOT VOTE
|
|
|
| |
|
| Item: |
2G. DISCUSSION AND ACTION: Should revocation of permits issued in error be allowed?" |
| |
|
| |
ACTION TAKEN: TO ALLOW THE REVOCATION OF PERMITS ISSUED IN ERROR.
SHOULD REVOCATION OF PERMITS ISSUED IN ERROR BE ALLOWED?
[DEVELOPMENT SERVICES/PLANNING, MATHEW MCELROY, (915) 541-4056] |
| |
|
| Votes: |
|
DISTRICT |
OFFICIAL |
VOTE |
|
1
|
Rep. Lilly |
YES
|
|
2
|
Rep. Byrd |
YES
|
|
3
|
Rep. Acosta |
YES
|
|
4
|
Rep. Robinson |
YES
|
|
5
|
Rep. Quintana |
YES
|
|
6
|
Rep. Holguin |
YES
|
|
7
|
Rep. S. Ortega |
YES
|
|
8
|
Rep. O'Rourke |
YES
|
|
-
|
Mayor Cook |
DID NOT VOTE
|
|
|
| |
|
| Item: |
2H. DISCUSSION AND ACTION: What should the duration of replacement permits be?" |
| |
|
| |
ACTION TAKEN: 1ST MOTION - TO ESTABLISH A 90 DAY DURATION FOR REPLACEMENT PERMITS. MOTION FAILED
WHAT SHOULD THE DURATION OF REPLACEMENT PERMITS BE?
[DEVELOPMENT SERVICES/PLANNING, MATHEW MCELROY, (915) 541-4056] |
| |
|
| Votes: |
|
DISTRICT |
OFFICIAL |
VOTE |
|
1
|
Rep. Lilly |
YES
|
|
2
|
Rep. Byrd |
YES
|
|
3
|
Rep. Acosta |
NO
|
|
4
|
Rep. Robinson |
NO
|
|
5
|
Rep. Quintana |
NO
|
|
6
|
Rep. Holguin |
NO
|
|
7
|
Rep. S. Ortega |
YES
|
|
8
|
Rep. O'Rourke |
YES
|
|
-
|
Mayor Cook |
NO (TIE BREAKER)
|
|
|
| |
|
| Item: |
2H. DISCUSSION AND ACTION: What should the duration of replacement permits be?" |
| |
|
| |
ACTION TAKEN: 2ND AND FINAL MOTION - TO ESTABLISH A 9 MONTH DURATION FOR REPLACEMENT PERMITS.
WHAT SHOULD THE DURATION OF REPLACEMENT PERMITS BE?
[DEVELOPMENT SERVICES/PLANNING, MATHEW MCELROY, (915) 541-4056] |
| |
|
| Votes: |
|
DISTRICT |
OFFICIAL |
VOTE |
|
1
|
Rep. Lilly |
NO
|
|
2
|
Rep. Byrd |
NO
|
|
3
|
Rep. Acosta |
YES
|
|
4
|
Rep. Robinson |
YES
|
|
5
|
Rep. Quintana |
YES
|
|
6
|
Rep. Holguin |
YES
|
|
7
|
Rep. S. Ortega |
NO
|
|
8
|
Rep. O'Rourke |
YES
|
|
-
|
Mayor Cook |
DID NOT VOTE
|
|
|
| |
|
| Item: |
3. Discussion and action on policy direction for expanding the moratorium period for digital signs (CEVM)." |
| |
|
| |
ACTION TAKEN: TO REMOVE THE MORATORIUM ON STATIC BILLBOARDS CONCURRENTLY WITH THE CONSIDERATION OF THE NEW REGULATIONS, AND TO MAINTAIN THE MORATORIUM ON DIGITAL BILLBOARDS.
DISCUSSION AND ACTION ON POLICY DIRECTION FOR EXPANDING THE MORATORIUM PERIOD FOR DIGITAL SIGNS (CEVM). [DEVELOPMENT SERVICES/PLANNING, MATHEW MCELROY, (915) 541-4056] |
| |
|
| Votes: |
|
DISTRICT |
OFFICIAL |
VOTE |
|
1
|
Rep. Lilly |
YES
|
|
2
|
Rep. Byrd |
YES
|
|
3
|
Rep. Acosta |
YES
|
|
4
|
Rep. Robinson |
YES
|
|
5
|
Rep. Quintana |
YES
|
|
6
|
Rep. Holguin |
YES
|
|
7
|
Rep. S. Ortega |
YES
|
|
8
|
Rep. O'Rourke |
YES
|
|
-
|
Mayor Cook |
DID NOT VOTE
|
|
|
| |
|
| Item: |
4. Discussion and action on amendments to the Sign regulations in Title 20 (Zoning) to include the timeline for finalization of the proposed regulations for billboard signs. " |
| |
|
| |
ACTION TAKEN: APPROVED THE TIMELINE AS PRESENTED BY STAFF FOR FINALIZATION OF THE PROPOSED REGULATIONS FOR BILLBOARD SIGNS BASED ON THE POLICY DIRECTION GIVEN.
DISCUSSION AND ACTION ON AMENDMENTS TO THE SIGN REGULATIONS IN TITLE 20 (ZONING) TO INCLUDE THE TIMELINE FOR FINALIZATION OF THE PROPOSED REGULATIONS FOR BILLBOARD SIGNS. [DEVELOPMENT SERVICES/PLANNING, MATHEW MCELROY, (915) 541-4056] |
| |
|
| Votes: |
|
DISTRICT |
OFFICIAL |
VOTE |
|
1
|
Rep. Lilly |
YES
|
|
2
|
Rep. Byrd |
YES
|
|
3
|
Rep. Acosta |
YES
|
|
4
|
Rep. Robinson |
YES
|
|
5
|
Rep. Quintana |
YES
|
|
6
|
Rep. Holguin |
YES
|
|
7
|
Rep. S. Ortega |
YES
|
|
8
|
Rep. O'Rourke |
YES
|
|
-
|
Mayor Cook |
DID NOT VOTE
|
|
|