My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-05-2021
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2020-2029
>
2021
>
05-05-2021
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/7/2021 12:36:42 PM
Creation date
7/7/2021 12:36:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Minutes
GOVBOARD
Planning Commission
DOCTYPE
minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Mounds View Planning Commission May 5, 2021 <br />Regular Meeting Page 3 <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />6. Other Planning Activity <br /> <br />A. Discussion – Sign Ordinance <br /> <br />Community Development Director Sevald stated previously, the Planning Commission asked to <br />discuss sign regulations. At the March 3rd Commission meeting, the scope was narrowed more <br />toward the brightness of dynamic (digital) signs. A comparison of sign codes specific to city <br />corridors similar to Mounds View Boulevard, for Ground, Wall, and Dynamic signs was <br />reviewed with the Commission. It was noted since the March meeting, information has been <br />added regarding the maximum brightness of Dynamic Signs. Although Mounds View has <br />maximum brightness standards, we do not have a tool to enforce this (costs about $2,000). <br />Rather, the City requires that dynamic displays be installed with a manual override, in the event <br />the sign’s automated dimmer fails. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Sevald explained staff was not aware of any complaints about <br />signage (excluding temporary signs), other than complaints generated by other City Staff. The <br />Commission is encouraged to drive the Boulevard a few times, and provide an opinion as to what <br />Commission members would change, if anything. For example, if there is a most favored, or <br />least favored sign characteristics. One thing to note is that older signs which are nonconforming, <br />can be repaired or replaced, but cannot be expanded. This means that some of the lesser desirable <br />signs will likely stay until the property is re-developed. Also, a number of variances have been <br />approved for signs over the years (e.g. McDonalds, BP, & Days Inn, Interactive Playground). <br />Staff commented further regarding the Sign Ordinance and requested feedback from the <br />Commission. <br /> <br />Commissioner Nelson discussed how there was a need for the City to control or set regulations <br />for digital signs. He supported the City having requirements in place to ensure digital billboards <br />were not a distraction for drivers. <br /> <br />Councilmember Meehlhause commented on the changes that were made to the Sign Ordinance <br />when Messiah Lutheran Church requested an electronic message board. <br /> <br />Commissioner Monn recommended the Sign Ordinance be reviewed to ensure all ADA <br />requirements were being met. She expressed concern with the frequency of sign changes and <br />colors that were being used at the Mermaid sign. She questioned if digital menu boards would be <br />addressed under this Ordinance. Community Development Director Sevald reported this would <br />be the case. <br /> <br />Chair Rundle stated he believed the digital signs were great for local businesses because they <br />allowed for frequent changes. He indicated he supported businesses being allowed to have <br />digital signs, so long as the changes were made within a reasonable amount of time so as not to <br />be a distraction. <br /> <br />Further discussion ensued regarding temporary signs and banners in Mounds View. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.