Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991 11-07 PCP r PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER NOVEMBER 7, 1991 STUDY SESSION 1. Call to Order: 7:30 p.m. 2 . Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes - October 10, 1991 and October 17, 1991 4. Chairperson's Explanation: The Planning Commission is 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. 5. Discussion Items a) Real Estate Sign Objectives and Objectives b) 30% limit on wall signs C) Minor Flood Plain Ordinance Amendment 6. Other Business 7. Adjournment • MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission Members FROM: Planning Staff DATE: November 1, 1991 SUBJECT: Real Estate Sign Regulations One of the items of discussion at the recent joint meeting of the Planning Commission and City Council was the regulation of real estate signs advertising space for lease. The discussion raised a number of issues and possibilities for further consideration. The following is a preliminary list of City objectives and options on this subject. We will be prepared to discuss them with the Commission at its November 7, 1991 meeting: Objectives 1. Space for lease signs should be temporary signs rather than permanent. In a depressed real estate market, commercial and industrial space remain vacant for a longer period of time. Space for lease signs have, thus, stayed up longer than normal. Concern has been expressed by the Planning Commission and City Council that these signs have a visual impact and should not be up perpetually. 2. Another objective is for the ordinance to be simple and straightforward so that it is easy to understand and to enforce. The previous ordinance required inspectors and realtors to know wall size and distance from right-of- way. It also limited space for lease signs, for the most part, to wall signs whereas industry practice is generally to use freestanding signs on lower buildings and wall signs on high-rise buildings. 3. There seems to be a general desire to limit the visual impact of space for lease signs through controlling time, size, location and perhaps materials of such signs. The more controls that are placed on such signs the more staff time will be required to administer the ordinance and the more likely that some sort of permit process will become necessary. The Commission may see other objectives than those listed above. It is important to clarify objectives in order to give clear direction as to what ordinance option is most appropriate. 11-7-91 1 Options We see at least six options for the Sign Ordinance to further City objectives: 1. The previous ordinance. In this option, the ordinance would revert to what was in force prior to September, 1991. This would limit real estate signs primarily to wall signs which could vary in size depending on the size of the wall and its distance from public right-of-way. On the positive side, this ordinance would reduce visual clutter somewhat and would generally allow signs to have the same proportional visual impact. On the negative side, the ordinance would preclude what is generally the industry standard - a 32 sq. ft. freestanding sign. It would also be difficult to understand and enforce. 2. The ordinance in place. This ordinance allows up to a 32 sq. ft. freestanding or wall sign which must be taken down, refurbished and date stamped each year. On the positive side, this ordinance allows the industry standard sign and would require maintenance of these signs (though the Sign Ordinance already requires that signs be maintained) . On the negative side, it would require considerable staff time to check the date on these signs and go after those who had not removed the sign, refurbished it and date-stamped it. 3. Ordinance recommended by Planning Commission. This ordinance would allow the standard 32 sq. ft. freestanding or wall sign for as long as there is a vacancy in the building. Sign maintenance would be governed by general provisions of the Sign Ordinance. On the positive side, this ordinance would be the easiest to understand and enforce and would be consistent with industry standards. On the negative side, space for lease signs might be up almost indefinitely as long as some vacancy exists in the building. 4. Ordinance with Permitting Process. Such an ordinance would require applicants to provide information on the size and location of a proposed real estate sign and to also document existing vacancies within a building. If these permits were temporary (perhaps one year) , then this information would have to be updated each year. On the positive side, the City would have prior control on the erection of real estate signs and could limit the time such signs are up if occupancy rates rise perhaps above a certain level. It would also generate a minor amount of revenue for the City. On the negative side, such an ordinance would require a substantial amount of staff time to develop, implement and enforce and such a 11-7-91 2 • time expenditure may be out of proportion with the level of public interest in this issue. 5. Part of a Sign Package (PUD) . In this option, a building owner would negotiate with the City Council a package of signery for a site, including freestanding and wall identification signery, directional signery, and real estate signery. On the positive side, the City might have more control over the appearance of signs and their overall aesthetic impact. On the negative side, such an arrangement would be time consuming and could lead to charges that the City was arbitrary and capricious in approving one package, but not another. 6. Invite B.O.M.A to devise an ordinance that meets City objectives. In this case, the City can negotiate not a given package of signs, but the regulations which would govern all space-for-lease signs. To some extent this has been done already, but could be pursued further. On the positive side, the resulting regulations should be understandable to building owners and managers and would hopefully meet City objectives. On the negative side, this process simply may not work. The two sides may not find sufficient common ground to develop a coherent ordinance acceptable to all concerned. In addition to discussing City objectives and options relating to space for lease signs, we would like to discuss briefly the 30% limit on wall signs in the C-2, I-1, and I-2 districts. Virtually no one has sought to exceed this limit. It may be appropriate to consider reducing it. We ask the Commission's input on this question as well. 11-7-91 3 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of , 1991 at p.m. at City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance relating to the date of the official flood plain map. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 569-3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES RELATING TO THE DATE OF THE OFFICIAL FLOOD PLAIN MAP THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended in the following manner: Section 35-2120. GENERAL PROVISIONS. 2 . Establishment of Official Zoning Map The Official Zoning Map together with all materials attached thereto is hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of this ordinance. The attached material shall include the Flood Insurance Study for the City of Brooklyn Center prepared by the Federal Insurance Administration dated (August 17, 1981] February 17, 1982, Floodway Boundary and Floodway Maps and Flood Insurance Rate Maps therein, all as amended by the attached Amendment No. 1, prepared by Barr Engineering. The Official Zoning Map shall be on file in the office of the City Clerk and the Zoning Administrator. Section 35-2140. FLOODWAY DISTRICT (FW) . 4. Standards for Floodway Special Uses g. Structural Works for Flood Control that will change the course, current or cross section of protected wetlands or public waters shall be subject to the provisions of Minnesota Statute, Chapter (105] 103G. Community-wide structural works for flood control intended to remove areas from the regulatory flood plain shall not be allowed in the floodway. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. r ORDINANCE NO. Adopted this day of 1991. Mayor Todd Paulson ATTEST: Deputy Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted. )