HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes08_0527City of Falcon Heights
Planning Commission Minutes
May 27, 2008
PRESENT: Commissioners Anderson, Hasegawa, Lukermann, Noble, Rodich. Also present were City Attorney Cynthia Kirchoff and Staff Liaison Deb Jones.
ABSENT: Commissioners Salzberg and Watkins, Council Liaison Kuettel
A quorum being present, the meeting was called to order by Vice Chair Barbara Lukermann at 7:02 p.m. The minutes of the April 22, 2008, meeting were approved.
PUBLIC COMMENT: CITY COUNCIL MORATORIUM ON PERMITS FOR CERTAIN SIGNS
The Chair called upon staff liaison Jones to give background information on this issue. The City Council has placed a moratorium on permits for any signs of this type while the planning
commission studies the issue and prepares its recommendation. The commission has been provided with a selection of city ordinances from six cities in the Metro area. Some of them prohibit
dynamic signs; others allow them with restrictions. The League of Minnesota Cities recommends that all municipalities make sure their sign codes are up to date. Commissioner Lukermann
opened the floor to public comment.
Jeannie McPherson, 1724 Asbury, expressed her concern that the City will be approached by business wanting these signs now that the subject has been raised..
William Warner of Warner Stellian was the next speaker. The store, a family business which has been there since 1954, has expanded into most of the building, with only two tenants remaining.
Their shopping center sign is old. They hope to upgrade it and would like to construct a digital sign. Their sign company has suggested that anything else would be outdated. Mr. Warner
brought some informational material for the commission. He said Warner Stellian would be open to displaying community messages on an electronic sign.
Commissioner Noble asked if Warner Stellian has a sign like they hope to propose at any of their other store locations. Mr. Warner said most of the other stores are leased and on a shared
signage area. The signage is newer but none of it is electronic.
Commissioner Anderson asked what the frequency of the messages is. Mr. Warner said there are many different options and again mentioned that he had brought a public relations packet
from the sign company. Signs could scroll every 30, 60 or 90 seconds he said, but there were many possibilities. Messages are controlled from a keyboard.
Haudi Kazemi, 1879 Tatum, said that he hoped the Commission would consider encouraging downlighting to reduce light pollution. He also suggested making a distinction between signs that
display just text messages and full video signs. He felt other sections of the sign code also deserve review.
No one else wished to speak, so Commissioner Lukermann closed the public comment period and opened the commission discussion.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION:
Ms. Jones introduced Cynthia Kirchoff from the city attorney’s office, Joel Jamnik being unable to attend. In response to a question from Ms. Lukermann, Ms. Kirchoff affirmed that cities
have indeed prohibited dynamic electronic signs. She said it is really up to the individual communities.
Commissioner Rodich said he had the impression from what Mr. Jamnik said last month that the city would be exposing itself to liability by imposing a complete ban (i.e. by making the
moratorium permanent). He said he did not favor something that would expose the city to legal challenges but would favor something that crafts appropriate controls. Commissioner Anderson
said she had heard that a St. Paul ordinance prohibiting dynamic electronic signs had been overturned because an exception was made for the Xcel Center sign and this was considered inequitable.
Falcon Heights should make sure that all potential applicants are treated consistently. She feels that text signs and video signs are quite different and that a distinction needs to
be made, also that thought should be given to preserving the character of the community.
Ms. Jones filled in a little additional information about the existing sign code, which does allow text signs within certain limits, reflecting the technology that was new when the sign
code was last revised. The only such sign she knew of in the city was on the monument sign at the credit union, which has recently been replaced. The changeable signs at the two gas
stations are inside the windows and thus not regulated. (Note: The new pricing sign at the BP is allowed under the existing code.)
Ms. Lukermann brought up the traffic safety findings in the study done by the City of Minnetonka and said the impact of these signs on public safety is a concern to her. Mr. Rodich said
maybe the city could require stationary display only, no animation or movement. Commissioner Noble expressed concern about the impact of changing display on adjacent residential neighborhoods,
the changing of light intensities and colors. Commissioners gave examples of their own response as drivers to electronic signs they have seen in other communities.
Ms. Lukermann pointed out that in Falcon Heights there are few commercial locations where electronic signs would be permitted. Size and location are already regulated. She said it seems
to her cities have been able to prohibit electronic signs on
the basis of traffic safety and impact on adjoining residential neighborhoods. She noted that one commissioner thinks the city should be open to LED signs.
The commissioners continued a general discussion of what kinds of limits might be imposed if the city were to allow dynamic signs under some circumstances. Several commissioners talked
about being prepared for other new signage technologies that might be coming up in the future. A good set of definitions is the very least the city should add, Ms. Lukermann said.
Commissioners discussed a plan of action for next month and made several requests of staff. Commissioners will read the examples and highlight the language they feel may be appropriate
for Falcon Heights. Staff will create maps showing buffers of different distances from residential properties to show areas where signs would be allowed if there is a required setback
from residential properties. Staff will also attempt to locate some signs commissioners can look at in other communities.
At the invitation of the Commission, Mr. Warner returned to the podium. He affirmed that his company wants to be a good neighbor. When asked how often Warner would be wanting to change
the display on their sign, he said they would abide by whatever rules the city had in place, but he spoke of rotating a series of six messages throughout the day, changing the cycle
weekly or monthly. When Ms. Anderson suggested that electronic displays might be dimmed or turned off outside of business hours, he repeated that the company would abide by whatever
regulations were in place. He does not envision scrolling or animation, although the sign he hopes to construct would be capable of that. Mr. Rodich said he would not support allowing
display signs to advertise outside entities (i.e. off premise).
Commissioners then discussed the pros and cons of regulating on the Bloomington model, that is, prohibiting dynamic signs in general but making some specific exceptions where they are
allowed under certain conditions. Ms. Anderson was in favor of excluding new technologies explicitly until the city moves to allow them.
Mr. Kazumi of 1879 Tatum was also given an opportunity to speak to the Commission again and comment on the discussion. He listed several examples of dynamic signs, mostly billboards
(which are not allowed in Falcon Heights). Instead of prohibition with exceptions, he would favor allowing the signs with specific things prohibited.
Commissioners closed the discussion by agreeing that new definitions at least are needed. They requested that staff contact the cities whose ordinances had been provided as examples
and find out how their code is working for them. Are there any problems? Any unanticipated consequences? Commissioners also requested an outline of possible options, a “menu.”
Another public comment session will be held at the next Planning Commission on June 24, 7:00 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. After adjournment Commissioners remained in the Council Chamber briefly to review the documents and DVD left by Mr. Warner.
Respectfully submitted,
Deborah Jones, Staff Liaison