CC PACKET 07222014 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Regular Meeting Minutes July 8, 2014 Page 3 I location of the proposed sign is on a parkway with a number of single-family units to the west 2 and there was input from residents both for and against the proposed sign with some concern 3 raised about light from the sign. 4 5 Mr. Tom Harrington, Development Director at St. Charles Borromeo, and Mr. Tom Bremer 6 trustee of St. Charles Borromeo, approached the City Council. Mr. Harrington stated they want 7 to have a more visible presence to communicate school events similar to the way events are 8 communicated at Wilshire Park and the high school and they believe an electronic message sign 9 is easier to manage than a manual sign that requires going outside to change the message, 10 especially in the winter. He advised the sign would only be on during certain hours and never 11 overnight and they would keep the message static. He stated they feel an electronic message 12 sign would eliminate the need for unsightly temporary signs and would provide a more visually 13 aesthetic means of communicating to the public and would be located perpendicular to residents 14 across the street. He stated he met with several of the neighbors and there were no dissenters 15 among the residents he talked to. He added they could partner with the City to provide public 16 awareness information on the proposed sign. 17 18 Mr. Bremer stated that a manual sign is a burden to change especially during inclement weather 19 and the sign needs to be changed frequently given the number of activities at the school. 20 21 Councilmember Stille stated this is not about St. Charles Borromeo, rather, this is about whether 22 the City wants to allow electronic message signs in churches throughout the community. He 23 stated the Planning Commission discussion centered on whether to allow the Catholic School to 24 have a sign and since this is one parcel with both a church and a school, the sign would be used 25 for church purposes as well and felt that other places of worship would want electronic message 26 signs and for that reason, he was not ready to allow other places of worship to have electronic 27 message signs. He added the City Council vetted the use of electronic message signs at City 28 Hall, Wilshire Park, and the high school when it passed the Sign Code several years ago because 29 it solely represents a public purpose, in other words, the message on those signs is of interest to 30 the entire community and everyone owns the schools and City Hall and that was the City 31 Council's rationale for permitting these signs in front of the schools and City Hall. 32 33 Councilmember Jenson stated he would like to see the City Code define illumination 34 requirements as well as timing when digital signs can be on and off, adding he felt the City Code 35 lacked that specification and makes it difficult for him to vote for this as it stands today. 36 37 Mayor Faust stated he did not believe the City would use the proposed sign for City business and 38 felt it would violate separation of church and state. He acknowledged St. Charles Borromeo's 39 desire to put information out to the community, but a lot of their population comes from other 40 parts of the metro and he felt the City would be giving them preferential treatment if the sign 41 were allowed. He was not sure the City could craft something so finely so as to only allow St. 42 Charles Borromeo to have an electronic message sign and therefore he could not support the 43 requested text amendment. 44 45 Councilmember Roth stated that two public schools have electronic message signs and the City 46 has three churches and he did not think the City would see a lot of electronic pollution. He felt 47 that sending someone out in January to change a manual sign was shortsighted and he would 48 support this text amendment. 5