DAPHNE, Ala. — Following a request from the Planning Commission during a meeting last month, Adrienne Jones, director of community development for the city, presented members of the city council with information regarding the current overlay …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
Please log in to continue |
DAPHNE, Ala. — Following a request from the Planning Commission during a meeting last month, Adrienne Jones, director of community development for the city, presented members of the city council with information regarding the current overlay districts and the sign allowances in those districts.
Members of the city council on Monday said they did not think the planning commission had the legal right to initiate discussions about a proposed overlay district.
Jones presented information about the Interstate 10 Overlay District, which included information helpful in studying the problem that businesses like Academy Sports and Outdoors is encountering with limited visibility along the I-10 corridor.
Jones provided the council with a list of existing sign provisions, a list of parcels within the corridor that are zoned for business, and what an additional district would look like.
Councilman August Palumbo said the planning commission was out of line.
“Let me say that for the planning commission to propose an overlay district to city council is highly unusual. It is not within the means of a planning commission to create an overlay district. The city council has the sole responsibility and authority to do so and it should be initiated with the city council,” Palumbo said. “There has been no discussion of such. Overlay districts are not created to increase signage. They are created for a business situation; that is why the state legislature passed an act which allows overlay districts. In the overlay districts we have done, we have modified some signage but that was ancillary for the reason of creating the overlay district. I think it is improper for the planning commission to even initiate this. It should come from the council.”
Councilman Ron Scott disagreed, citing the Code of Alabama, which he said gave the planning commission the powers.
“The Code of Alabama — which we apparently, as this council, don’t always pay attention to — gives the planning commission the powers to do planning, which includes overlay districts.”
Scott said there are two ways an overlay district can be brought about: administratively or per the request of an individual, but each way can be addressed by the planning commission.
“It is not only appropriate that they bring this to us, it is what their job is,” Scott said.
Palumbo said in his seven years on the council the planning commission had never come to the council to propose an overlay district.
“The overlay district was considered by the council, created by the council, sent to the planning commission for the particulars for it to come out; it has never gone the other way,” Palumbo said.
Scott, however, said all the overlay districts have gone through planning commission first.
“To have a council member to basically call down a volunteer board or committee that sits in the city and to chastise them for doing what their job is, I think, is out of line,” Scott said.
Palumbo blamed the planning commission for what he called a monstrosity.
“I have chastised the planning commission and will continue to do so. We are stuck with a 90-foot monstrosity for Dick’s Sporting Goods because of the planning commission …. I think they are going beyond. I think they are circumventing the city council,” Palumbo said.
In other news, Monday, the council: