PCAgenda_08Jul22 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

' Watkins asked if commissioners had any preferences among the other city • ordinances provided as examples as a model. He pointed out that Arden Hills seemed the most restrictive at the moment, although theirs is subject to change when their area plan is done. Rodich asked if dynamic signs could be a conditional use, perhaps with the exception of time and temperature? He would be in favor of that. He also sees the text only signs as being less problematic than full video. Jamnik advised the commission that the conditional use permit is used for uses that are expected to be allowed. The default is to allow, with conditions; it is very difficult to say no. He also cautioned that requiring a conditional use permit could be considered prior restriction from a freedom of speech standpoint. In response to a further question from Rodich, Mr. Jamnik said he would advise against a blanket requirement of a conditional use permit for all dynamic signs. An appropriate limit might be for gas stations, which are already a conditional use -making it part of that. Anderson said that in Minnetonka they were finding out that people were distracted even by the expectation that the sign would change, no matter how infrequently it changed. Maybe even a day is too short; a week might be more appropriate. She guessed this would not be a problem with respect to the courts. • Salzberg noted that some cities, including Forest Lake, seem to create most of the restriction in the way they craft definitions. Commissioners suggested that staff come up with good definitions. Salzberg went on to say that he likes the idea of allowing LED signs because they might use less energy than floodlit signs and that having the capability of changing for time and temperature and prices might be a good thing. Anderson expressed concern that new technologies could render new definitions obsolete, that the city needs something fairly "robust" to accommodate new technologies. Commissioners found similarities among definitions used in several cities. Some cities exclude signs that change infrequently from their definition of "dynamic." Salzberg said then it would be all right to have a sign that could change more often as long as it did not change frequently. What we do not want is people expecting change as they drive by. There was additional discussion about driver expectations and distraction effects related to duration of message. Anderson said she does not feel that dynamic signs are even that effective a marketing technique. Noble asked if the city might then prohibit dynamic signs in B-3 (on safety grounds) but allow in other commercial- districts with less traffic. Hasegawa said he felt restrictions on brightness would be fairly important because all of these areas are close to residential districts. Commissioners discussed monitoring and enforcement implications of brightness and transition limits and other possible restrictions. • The chair then pro osed lookin at the slate of o tions resent in the staff re ort and p g p P p seeing of some of them could be eliminated. Commissioners quickly eliminated the City of Falcon Heights -Planning Commission Meeting of June 24, 2008 -Page 3 of 4