My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7/10/1985
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1985
>
7/10/1985
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:51:13 AM
Creation date
6/12/2015 10:32:03 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
07/10/1985
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
79
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
JUL 101985 <br />BOOK 61 m-uE 436 <br />the other would involve development of the ordinance by the <br />in-house planning staff. Regardless of which alternative is <br />selected, the staff would be responsible for conducting <br />workshop meetings and making revisions to the proposed <br />ordinance as well as taking the draft ordinance through the <br />public hearing process before the Planning and Zoning Commis- <br />sion and the Board of County Commissioners. <br />The primary advantages of having a consultant prepare the <br />draft ordinance relate to experience. Because a consultant <br />has developed sign ordinances for various other juris- <br />dictions, he would have more experience, be more aware of <br />typical issues, and have a better understanding of possible <br />solutions of sign matters than the in-house staff. Using <br />in-house staff would require substantial time for research <br />and analysis, time that a consultant, already familiar with <br />sign ordinances, would not need to spend. Since Solin & <br />Associates has already prepared the other sections of the new <br />zoning code and has adequately completed this work, the staff <br />feels that Solin & Associates should prepare the County's new <br />sign ordinance. <br />RECOMMENDATION <br />The staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners <br />authorize the staff to enter into a contractual agreement <br />with Solin & Associates for preparation of the County's sign _ <br />ordinance. - <br />Vice Chairman Scurlock noted that a sign ordinance is <br />probably one of the most difficult to draft. It is a complicated <br />and sensitive issue, and he wanted some reassurance that those <br />sensitivities are going to be looked at closely by the consult- <br />ants. He realized that Mr. Solin did handle this for the City of <br />Vero Beach and, therefore, should be cognizant of the problems <br />involved. <br />Director Keating assured the Vice Chairman that the <br />consultant will be very aware of what the County wants. He <br />pointed out that the staff workshops all these ordinances <br />extensively to assure that when the ordinance comes to the Board, <br />it will be consistent with what the various organizations want. <br />Vice Chairman Scurlock noted that religious symbols are not <br />to be considered signs, and this was agreed. <br />Commissioner Bowman pointed out that there is nothing under <br />General Provisions dealing with moving signs, and she felt these <br />should be considered, as well as the tinsel trail, streamers and <br />pennants seen on South U.S.1, which she did not feel are <br />appropriate to our community. <br />The Administrator and other Board members agreed. <br />W <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.