Laserfiche WebLink
M ® M <br />make sure there is competent substantial evidence on the record <br />to make a finding of fact. The fact is that the applicant <br />himself has admitted that his building acts as a sign and that is <br />what he intended it to do. ,.All the rest is a matter of law, and <br />if it goes to court, it will be a legal issue, and both Planning <br />staff and the legal staff agree that our law does support the <br />finding that this building is a sign. <br />Commissioner Bird asked the Attorney whether he felt we are <br />on good legal ground today to make a determination under the <br />original sign ordinance as to whether this constitutes a sign. <br />Attorney Vitunac advised that he did, and in answer to <br />Attorney Vocelle's contention that this is capricious, he pointed <br />out that Kentucky Fried Chicken would be in violation if they <br />built their building in the shape of a drumstick. <br />Commissioner Wodtke noted that in many shopping center <br />areas, you see small photo centers, mini banks, post office <br />facilities,, etc.; there is no question but that you know what <br />they are. He wished to know if they will continue to be allowed. <br />Director Keating confirmed they would. <br />Commissioner Scurlock believed that Commissioner Wodtke is <br />referring to general type businesses while the proposed building <br />is for a special corporation and is actually a sign of their <br />particular business. He felt there is no question that it is a <br />sign. <br />Attorney Vocelle argued that the portion of the building <br />that is a sign are the blue letters on the front that say Twistee <br />Treat. He continued that he has not been able to f,ind'any <br />definition of a sign where an actual building has been held to <br />constitute the sign itself and contended that the building <br />itself, no matter what form it takes, is not the sign under the <br />existing sign ordinances. Attorney Vocelle noted that the City <br />Attorney expressed his opinion re a sim.ilar type building that <br />since the City's existing sign ordinance did not specifically say <br />that a building could be a sign, they couldn't prohibit it. He, <br />37 <br />NOV *2 0 1985900K 62 PAGE 803 <br />