Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013 01-31 PCM MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA JANUARY 31, 2013 CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Rahn at 7:02 p.m. ADMINISTER OATH OF OFFICE Mr. Benetti administered Oath of Office to Randall Christensen and Benjamin Freedman. ROLL CALL Chair Sean Rahn, Commissioners Scott Burfeind, Randall Christensen, Benjamin Freedman, Carlos Morgan, Michael Parks, and Stephen Schonning were present. Also present were Secretary to the Planning Commission Tim Benetti, Director of Business & Development, Gary Eitel, and Planning Commission Recording Secretary Rebecca Crass. APPROVAL OF MINUTES —JANUARY 17, 2013 There was a motion by Commissioner Parks, seconded by Commissioner Burfeind, to approve the minutes of the January 17, 2013 meeting as submitted. The motion passed. 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. APPOINTMENT OF 2013 CHAIR PRO TEM—APPOINTED ANNUALLY BY CHAIR The Chair of the Planning Commission thanked those Commission members that indicated an interest in being appointed as Chair Pro Tem of the 2013 Planning Commission. Chair Rahn further stated he would appoint Commissioner Burfeind as Chair Pro Tem of the 2013 Planning Commission. APPLICATION NO. 2013-002 LOREN VAN DER SLIK/GATLIN DEVELOPMENT Mr. Benetti explained that the applicant requested to delay action on this item until the February 14, 2013 meeting to allow more time to adjust their plat. A motion was made by Commissioner Parks, seconded by Commissioner Schonning, to postpone the final plat until the February 14, 2013 Planning Commission meeting. Voting in favor: Chair Rahn, Commissioners Burfeind, Christensen, Freedman, Morgan, Parks and Schonning And the following voted against the same: None The motion passed unanimously. Page 1 1-31-13 DISCUSSION ITEM — AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 34, SIGNS, BY ALLOWING "DYNAMIC MESSAGE SIGNS" TO CERTAIN PUBLIC AND SEMI-PUBLIC USES LOCATED IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Mr. Benetti explained that staff had been approached by a sign company to install a dynamic message board sign at Evergreen Elementary School, 7020 Dupont Avenue N. He added the company was informed that these types of signs are prohibited in residential districts (which are typically where schools are located) and the company asked the City Council to consider an ordinance amendment to allow such signs for public or institutional type uses. Staff was also approached by a church with a similar request, however, these types of signs would not be allowed since the church is also located in a residential zoning district. Mr. Benetti further explained City Council was generally supportive of this request and directed staff to present the matter to the Planning Commission for formal consideration. He added DMS type signs are only allowed in the C2, I-1 and I-2 districts and prohibited in all other districts. Benetti also stated that if a school or church were located in one of these permitted zoning districts, a DMS would be allowed under the provisions of the Ordinance. Mr. Benetti added Public and Semi-Public Places should include uses such as schools, places of worship, city hall, the community center, Hennepin County library, and others, however, City Code is silent or absent of what exactly constitutes a "Public" or Semi-Public" use or place and when questioned, this determination is either made by the Zoning Administrator or City Council. Mr. Benetti stated the following modifications to the ordinance was suggested by a sign vendor: k. A dynamic messages sign "DMS," is permitted only in the C2, 1-1 and 1-2 Districts and for Public and Semi-Public Places in all Districts). A DMS is also subject to the all applicable requirements of Seetie~ 34 140.3.'^ of this ordinance for the district in which such signs are placed. A DMS message must remain constant for at least two seconds when such sign is in use. A DMS within a residential zoned district or within 50 feet of a single family residence shall be turned off or programmed to go blank between the hours of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. daily. All DMS shall be equipped with dimming technology that automatically adjusts their brightness in direct correlation with ambient light conditions. Mr. Benetti also stated City staff would also like the Commission to make a determination regarding keeping or adding the "technical" specifications to the standards below and may also consider allowing certain uses under the C 1 (Service/Office) and C 1 A (Service/Office) Districts the ability to display DMS type signs: No DMS shall exceed 0.3 foot candles above ambient light as measured from a preset distance depending on sign size. Measurement distance shall be determined using the following equation: the square root of the product of the sign area and one-hundred. [Example using a 12 square foot DMS: x(12 x 100) = 34.6 feet measuring distance.] Page 2 1-31-13 Mr. Benetti stated staff requests the Planning Commission consider the proposal to allow dynamic message signs (DMS) in zoning districts other than the C-2, I-1 and I-2 districts, specifically for Public and Semi-Public Uses/Places. He added the Commission should also consider a new definition of what a Public/Semi-Public Use or Place is, in order to provide clarification and applicability of future sign applications. Mr. Benetti further stated if the Commission chooses not to accept the proposal, City Staff will prepare a response to the City Council which rejects any sign code amendment at this time. He added the Planning Commission can also direct staff to address this item through the public hearing process at the February 28, 2013 meeting when a draft ordinance would be prepared for consideration. Chair Rahn asked for further clarification regarding the following suggested language: "A DMS within a residential zoned district or within 50 feet of a single family residence shall be turned off or programmed to go blank between the hours of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. daily. Mr. Benetti explained the language provided was suggested by a sign vendor and he would be more likely to suggest if a DMS sign is allowed in aM residential district, the sign must be turned off between 10 pm and 6 am and certain illumination standards would be required. Mr. Eitel explained City Council asked the Planning Commission's recommendation regarding defining public and semi-public uses and also what type of lighting signage could be allowed in residentially zoned areas. City Council is looking for advice and input from the Planning Commission as to how the ordinance could be amended. Commissioner Christensen stated that in his neighborhood churches and schools are all surrounded by residential properties and allowing DMS signs will impact those neighborhoods. Mr. Eitel replied that Perry Avenue where Willow Lane Elementary is located is not a collector roadway. He added if such a sign were allowed, it should have been along the back side on Brooklyn Boulevard since signs to communicate to the public should be on the well-traveled roads and not on the side streets. He further stated that when the Northwest Family Services building was constructed, access to the school on Brooklyn Boulevard was eliminated. Commissioner Rahn stated that this appears to be an issue of the signs catching up with technology since existing schools and churches may want to upgrade existing signs on their property. Commissioner Burfeind asked if there is a standard that dictates which street a sign should be placed. Mr. Benetti replied no; however, if a new school or church were to come in to the city, they would need to meet today's standards for placement of signs. Page 3 1-31-13 Commissioner Parks stated that there is a certain feeling you get when you live in certain zoning districts and some of these lighted signs get very bright around residential areas. He feels it would be appropriate to have a public hearing to further discuss this. He added he does not know what 0.3 ft. candles looks like and he would like to know how bright that is. Commissioner Burfeind stated he would support these signs with more restrictions to a time frame when the signs would be turned off. He added he is hesitant to support allowing DMS signs in certain areas such as along Brooklyn Boulevard since that would be distracting and take away from the long range Brooklyn Boulevard vision. He added if the streetscape amenities continue in the Brooklyn Boulevard corridor it might not fit to have the DMS signs up and down Brooklyn Boulevard. Mr. Benetti replied that hypothetically, if a business in a C-2 zoned district wished to replace an existing allowable sign on that property, and Code allowed them an 80-sf. sized wall or pylon/cabinet type sign, they could replace that sign with a full-sized 80 sq. ft. DMS sign, unless certain restrictions were established or provided for under size limitation standards. Benetti stated other communities' ordinances have size limitations built-in to their ordinances, and he suggested this may be an item or point the Commission could consider. Commissioner Christensen stated that with the variety of signs located in the city, he feels there should be further discussion regarding Dynamic Messaging Signs and where they can be located as well as establishing restrictions. Commissioner Freedman asked if the concern is the annoyance to the neighbors or is a distraction to have the signs. Mr. Eitel confirmed the potential annoyance to neighbors was the concern of the Councilmember. Commissioner Freedman asked if other cities that allow these signs have received complaints. Mr. Benetti replied that information was not available but he could contact neighboring cities to determine if complaints have been received. He added there are many cities that do not allow these signs in any zoning district, however, with this new technology, these are the signs of the future. Chair Rahn stated it seems the City Council would like a public hearing to discuss this further and he would like staff to provide examples of light standards and also feedback from other cities that allow these signs. Commissioner Parks stated he feels signs could be allowed in areas where they do not affect residential properties, however, in residential areas, there are concerns with the brightness of the signs. He added he would be favorable to allow Dynamic Messaging Signs in C 1 and C2 zoned districts. It was the general consensus to discuss the parameters at the February 14th Planning Commission meeting and prepare for a public hearing on the February 28tH There were no other discussion items. Page 4 1-31-13 OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Commissioner Burfeind, seconded by Commissioner Parks, to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:12 p.m. Chair Recorded and transcribed by: Rebecca Crass Page 5 1-31-13