04/13/2005 P&Z Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Pl anni ng & Zo ni n g B o ar d A p r il 13 , 200 5 Page 23 APPROVED MINUTES VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. AUAR Update Item skipped due to the lateness of the hour. B. Temporary Signs Mr. Smyser stated a number of business owners attended the March 9 meeting and expressed concerns regarding the regulati on of signage. The P & Z asked that the business owners get together and present thei r preferences for the regulation of temporary signs. He noted they had received two sets of pr oposals. The P & Z had reached agreement on requirements for banners and portable signs. The two proposals rece ived from separate business owners differ from these requiremen ts. The P & Z will need to decide if it wants to reconsider the requireme nts for banners a nd portable signs. The P & Z agreed to recommend no regulati on of window signs. There are other forms of temporary signage to address. Thes e include pennants and the miscellaneous inexpensive cardboard and plasti c signs often seen at retail businesses in the City. With respect to signs in County right-of-wa y, staff contacted the Anoka County Highway Department to discuss the possi bility of metal sign advertising several businesses, like the ones seen on freeways. Anoka County does not have such a sign program. The topic has come up and the County specifically decided no t to pursue such a pr ogram. Even if the City were to request this t ype of signs, it is the County’s policy not to allow them in County rights of way. The County does allow signs for public uses such as parks and public buildings, but not for advert ising for private businesses. The only exception has been when access to a business is cut off by a County road project. Then, a sign might be put up gi ving directions to the new access such as a frontage road. Chair Rafferty requested the discu ssion be contained to banners only. Mr. Laden stated having reviewed the two di fferent proposals, he believed the first one dealt strictly with banners, he was in favor of keeping what they had set already decided for banners. Mr. Hyden replied he was in agreement with that. Mr. Nelson stated he believed this was too re strictive. He noted he was more aware of banners in other Cities since he was made aware of this issue. He asked if there were any other policies they had looked at from other Cities. Mr. Hyden replied staff had prepared such an analysis and the Board had reviewed those policies. He reviewed some of other City policies.