Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008 03-27 PCMMINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA STUDY SESSION MARCH 27, 2008 CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Rahn at 7:08 p.m. ROLL CALL Chair Sean Rahn, Commissioners Kara Kuykendall, Stan Leino, Michael Parks, and Tim Roche were present. Also present were Gary Eitel, Community Development Director, Secretary to the Planning Commission/Planning and Zoning Specialist Ronald Warren, and Planning Commission Recording Secretary Rebecca Crass. Rachel Lund and Della Young were absent and excused. ADMINISTER OATH OF OFFICE Mr. Warren administered the Oath of Office to Michael Parks. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Februarv 14.2008 There was a motion by Commissioner Roche, seconded by Commissioner Kuykendall, to approve the minutes of the February 14, 2008 meeting as submitted. The motion passed. Commissioner Parks abstained as he was not present at the meeting. CHAIR'S EXPLANATION Chair Rahn explained the Planning Commission's role as an advisory body. One of the Commission's functions is to hold public hearings. In the matters concerned in these hearings, the Commission makes recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes all final decisions in these matters. DISCUSSION ITEM - FLASHING SIGNS Mr. Warren introduced Gary Eitel to the Commission and stated that he would have some comments to address to the Commission later. Mr. Warren described the history of allowable uses of flashing signs as defined in the city ordinances and added that the City Council had discussed a possible amendment to the ordinance that would address changing messages, maximum size ratio of the message panel to the principal sign and the allowance of rotating or motion signs. Mr. Warren explained dynamic message signs and stated how they are allowed to be part of an existing sign in the C2, 11 and 12 zoning districts. Mr. Warren further described various signs located around the city that have been brought to the Planning Commission for review by the City Council. He explained that the Planning Commission should have a discussion to determine if the sign ordinance is appropriate or if 3-27-08 Page 1 current sign requirements create any hazards or safety issues on public roadways and should be modified. Community Development Director, Gary Eitel , addressed the Planning Commission and stated that Councilmember Lasman asked to have this item on the City Council agenda as a discussion item. Following that discussion, the item has been referred to the Planning Commission for review and consideration. Mr. Eitel continued by stating that as technology changes, signs that at one time weren't affordable, now are and business owners prefer to use the types of signs that can create a distraction particularly ones with unusual motion or rotation and flashing lights. The City Council would like the Planning Commission to review the ordinance for a possible amendment to put a limit on the types of signs that create distractions. Mr. Eitel pointed out that the Commission might want to consider that electronic message boards be part of a sign but should not dominate the sign. They should also consider whether or not rotating signs be allowed in the city. He further stated that the City Council feels that these signs might have gone too far and they would like to see less of these types of signs since they can cheapen the look of the city by trying try to attract attention rather than letting the public know where they are. A discussion by the Planning Commission took place regarding rotating signs and flashing signs. Chair Rahn asked Mr. Warren for information regarding the history of signs at Brookdale. Mr. Warren responded that the owners of Brookdale had requested a variance from the sign ordinance regarding the size and number of signs as well as a request for lighting not normally allowed. The City Council had approved larger than normal signs for Brookdale and allowed a more modified version of the sign than what was later installed. Commissioner Leino stated that he agrees with the staff comments regarding signs and added that there are many signs in certain communities that are very distracting. He noted that flashing and rotating signs along the freeway can be a real distraction to drivers but may be less of an issue along a street such as Brooklyn Boulevard. Mr. Warren responded by explaining what the intent of the ordinance is and that the allowance of flashing signs was intended to be secondary to the sign itself. Commissioner Roche stated that he likes signs such as Atlantis Pools but feels that the rotating sign at Hansen Brothers Fence is a nuisance. Chair Rahn stated that he agrees that if a sign moves too rapidly, it creates a distraction and perhaps the Planning Commission should consider the time constraints allowed when lighted signs are changing to address the length of time that the sign says one thing before it changes. Commissioner Kuykendall stated that she has concerns that if you make the flashing message too long, the signs becomes unproductive. Chair Rahn asked Mr. Warren if the ordinance addresses animation. 3-27-08 Page 2 Mr. Warren responded that "dynamic signs" refer to a message on the sign that can be changed remotely not to animation, characters, etc. that are changed. Flashing signs are prohibited. Commissioner Parks stated that he believes that what solves the problem of the distraction is to make the sign fade in and fade out rather than scrolling across or make it display for ten seconds or more. Community Development Director, Gary Eitel, clarified that sign ordinances should not address a particular business but rather should regulate the size of a sign and the lighting types allowed. Commissioner Roche stated that he likes that there are no visible signs along the freeway in Maple Grove and that Rogers is very busy. He agrees with Commissioner Parks comments. He asked if Staff could check into other community's sign ordinance regulations. Commissioner Leino asked if consideration could be made regarding the timing of the sign and added that he likes the fade in/fade out on a sign rather than motion. Commissioner Leino also stated his dislike of portable lighted signs often seen around the City. Mr. Warren explained that those type of sings are prohibited under city ordinances except with an Administrative Land Use Permit. After further discussion by the Planning Commission, it was their consensus to direct Staff to review the sign ordinances of other communities to review the types of signs being allowed and report back to the Planning Commission on their findings for further review and discussion within 30 days. OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Commissioner Leino, seconded by Commissioner Parks, to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m. ' Chair" Recorded and transcribed by: Rebecca Crass 3-27-08 Page 3