Loading...
PL 05/16/2001 - 30928� CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. MAY 16. 2001 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Savage called the May 16, 2001, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:30 p. m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Diane Savage, Barbara Johns, Dave Kondrick, Leroy Oquist, Larry Kuechle Members Absent: Connie Modig, Dean Saba Others Present: Paul Bolin, Planning Coordinator Kelly Koenig, Daktronics, Inc. Wayne Dahl, North Metro Spinecare Specialists, PA APPROVE THE MAY 2. 2001, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES: MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to approve the May 2, 2001, Planning Commission meeting minutes as presented. � UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. � PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Zoning Text Amendment, ZTA #01-01, by Daktronics, Inc., Wayne Dahl, to remove Section 214.07.1 B of the City Sign Code, regarding automatic changeable signs, which states, "the message shall not change more than once every fifteen (15) minutes except for a sign displaying time, temperature and/or date". MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED AT 7:32 P.M. Mr. Bolin stated that the petitioner, Daktronics, Inc., is seeking to change the Zoning Text of the Fridley Sign Code to allow automatic changeable signs displaying more than time, temperature, and date to change messages more than once every 15 minutes for all commercial and industrial districts. Staff recommends denial of this zoning text amendment. The petitioner has failed to provide any reasoning to justify this change to the sign code, and there does not appear to be community wide support for this text amendment. The quick changing messages seen on electronic reader boards in other communities may be detrimental to the public safety. It is not uncommon for a driver's eyes to be drawn to the changing messages on the these signs. Appeals Commission and City Council have denied requests for variances to this code section (as recently as February 2001). 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 16, 2001 PAGE 2 ^ Mr. Bolin stated that the petitioner is a manufacturer of electronic signs. The Fridley Sign Code states in Section 214.07.1 B: "The message shall not change more than once every fifteen minutes except for a sign displaying time, temperature and/or date". The Fridley Sign Code has undergone minor modifications since the last major revision of the Code in 1976. During the last major revision, a committee consisting of City officials, sign company representatives and the local Chamber of Commerce worked as a team to develop an effective sign code. The committee that carried out this major revision developed an ordinance that has been so effective, that only minor changes to correct "typo's" or to clarify points have been made over the past 25 years. The section of the code, which the petitioner is proposing the City delete, was reviewed in 1984 and 1988 when minor changes were made to the sign ordinance. The petitioner has failed to provide any reasoning or supporting materials to justify this proposed change to the sign code. The petitioner's supplement to the City's application sheet simply states: "Petitioner requests that paragraph B under code 214.07 be eliminated." Mr. Bolin stated this request did not come to the City through the Chamber of Commerce or any other collection of businesses. Daktronics, Inc. is the official petitioner listed on the application sheet; however, Dr. Wayne Dahl is a co-petitioner. The Appeals Commission and City Council both unanimously denied this same petitioner's variance request to this code section in February due to the concems about safety and visual clutter. The quick changing messages seen on electronic reader boards in other communities may be detrimental to the public safety. It is not uncommon for a driver's eyes to be drawn to the changing messages on these signs. If a portion of the message is not caught by the driver, often they will be trying to catch the remainder of the message in their rear view mirror as they drive past the message center. This is a threat to public safety. � Mr. Kuechle asked if there were any state codes as to what can be permissible for changeable readerboard signs or City codes. �,"'� Mr. Bolin stated that the State leaves the sign code up to the local municipalities. It is staff's discretion to be as permissive as they want regarding these signs. Most communities do not have a time requirement on its boards, yet some cities do not allow those signs at all. Staff has had positive comments regarding the sign code in general. People feel the size limits are very generous and, other than this petitioner, there have not been many complaints on the sign code. The petitioner, Kelly Koenig of Daktronics, Inc., stated that Dr. Dahl is not the only individual who has requested an electronic sign change. Based on the way the code is written, businesses have chosen not to purchase electronic signs. Modern society demands information these days. Without signs people would not know which way to go, there is a need for signage. People shop from their cars nowadays more than they ever have. These types of electronic signs are used widely. These signs are more of an ally with govemment and transportation. Construction signs alert drivers with more than one message. What makes Fridley different than the other 3,000,000 communities in the country that do allow them? Technology changes along with the other things in life that change. They did not approach the Chamber of Commerce, but their intent was to see how the majority of business owners felt about this issue. They have a valid concem among the business owners with this survey that was circulated for them to sign if they agreed with the changing of the code. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to accept the Petition for Fridley Change of Text Amendment. 2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 16, 2001 PAGE 3 ^ UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Koenig stated that he had a memorandum from the Department of Transportation adopted in 1996 regarding the changeable message signs. It states "Changeable message signs are acceptable for off premise signs regardless of the type of technology used. If the interpretation of the state/federal agreement allows such types of signs, because of the increased use of changeable message signs, we believe it is timely to restate our position conceming these signs." MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Ms. Johns, to accept the memorandum. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Koenig stated that if signs are not a public safety issue, he trains people that operate the signs in the most effective manner. A continuously traveling message would not be most effective. If a sign is not programmed well, the business will suffer. There is not a lot of documentation stating that these types of signs cause accidents. It is merely speculation that the signs cause accidents. They would like to take these findings to the Chamber of Commerce and ask for its suppo�t. The section in the Intemational Zoning Code book is open to interpretation, which was used in writing the Fridley sign code. It is open to amendments. Mr. Kuechle asked where the problem is when the City allows a change every fifteen minutes. � How many lines is a driver able to read at a typical speed on Highway 65 or University Avenue? If a sign is in the process of moving, it may be even harder to read. Mr. Koenig stated that you can read a word from about 50 feet away. You may have a message on the sign you can read from an acceptable distance away with a character height of at least 20 inches tall. Allowable square footage of sign does not accommodate what would be considered a complete thought. They define message as a complete thought which may take multiple frames to accomplish. The ability to change the words rapidly in less than fifteen minutes means only five to ten seconds of viewing time, from the furthest distance that you see the signs to the time you passed it. The message requiring multiple frames to get the word across makes it possible to live with fifteen minutes. Traveling messages are not a mode of communication, but should be allowed to change more than once every fifteen minutes. If you have seven words on your display, you have about five to seven seconds to read that depending on the distance. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 7:49 P.M. Mr. Oquist stated that he was on the Planning Commission when that ordinance was passed. The City does allow movable signs; it is just the timing factor. They are to display a message out there and the Sign Code as written is good and he would be against that change. Mr. Kuechle concurred. The case is not made stcongly enough that it would be beneficial to a �"1 very large number of people other than the people who want to sell the signs. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 16. 2001 PAGE 4 Ms. Savage also agreed. When she was on the Appeals Commission, one of her concems with ��� the variance request for signs was that they are a visual pollutant, and she would like to get rid of all the billboards and limit signs only to let people know where the businesses are. She is very proud of the Fridley sign ordinance and if there is a special need for such a sign, they can be presented as a variance request or special use request. This would be opening up the door to many signs that would add to the visual pollution, and she is opposed to any change. Mr. Kondrick stated that he was also on the Planning Commission when this was brought up before. He has not changed his mind since then. He believed the Sign Code they have functions well. Changing the code would mean visual pollution, and it is a danger to have messages like that. Ms. Johns stated that it is a safety issue and she favors the fifteen minute time lapse. People go a lot faster than 45 miles per hour on University to give them more time to read it. If they change this, she can see all sorts of signs popping up. This would be hindrance to drivers and people should be paying more attention to the roads, rather than what is on the side of the road. MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to recommend denial ZTA #01-01. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Savage stated this item goes to City Council on June 4. ^ 2. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 25. 2001, APPEALS COMMISSION MEETINGS: MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Johns, to receive the minutes. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 5. 2001. HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING: MOTION by Ms. Johns, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to receive the minutes. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE MARCH 28, 2001, APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING: MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to receive the minutes. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 2. 2001, PARKS AND RECREATION � COMMISSION MEETING: 0 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 16, 2001 � MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Ms. Johns, to receive the minutes. �, ,� PAGE 5 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to adjoum the meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE MAY 16, 2001, PLANNING COMMISSION WAS ADJOURNED AT 7:59 P.M. R spectfully submitted, ' �' �..�� Si e L. Joh on � Recording Secretary 5