Planning Commission Minutes 12-01-1992
.
.
.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING ~ MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, December 1, 1992 . 7 p.m.
Members Present:
Richard Martie, Jon Bogart, Cindy Lemm, Richard
Carlson, Brian Stumpf
Members Absent:
None
Staff Present:
Gary Anderson, Jeff O'Neill
1.
The meeting was called to order by Acting Chairperson, Cindy Lerrun, at
7:05 p.m. Acting Chair, Cindy Lemm, opened the meeting to officially welcome
Planning Commission Member, Brian Stumpf.
2.
A motion was made by Richard Carlson and seconded by Richard Martie to
approve the minutes of the regular meeting held October 7, 1992. Voting in
favor: Richard Martie, Jon Bogart, Cindy Lemm, Richard Carlson. Abstaining:
Brian Stumpf.
A motion was made by Richard Martie and seconded by Jon Bogart to approve
the minutes of the special meeting held November 4, 1992. Voting in favor:
Richard Martie, Jon Bogart, Cindy Lemm, Richard Carlson. Abstaining: Brian
Stumpf.
A motion was made by Jon Bogart and seconded by Richard Martie to approve
the minutes of the regular meeting held November 4, 1992. Voting in favor:
Richard Martie, Jon Bogart, Cindy Lemm, Richard Carlson. Abstaining: Brian
Stumpf.
3. Review city ordinance regulatin~ banners and temporary sims.
Jeff O'Neill, Assistant Administrator, reviewed the request to review the
existing ordinance regulating temporary banners and signs and to consider
calling a public hearing to amend the present ordinance.
O'Neill explained that under the current regulations, banners are allowed for
10 consecutive days, then after a 180~day waiting period, an additional 10
consecutive days is allowed per calendar year.
Page 1
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 12/V92
Portable signs are allowed for 20 total days in a calendar year.
O'Neill reported that there are no cities that we know of that allow full-time
use of banners in addition to their existing sign systems except for the City of
Coon Rapids, which allows temporary signs on a very limited basis. He
emphasized that as nice as promotional banners may be, once you allow them
you have no control. The City cannot regulate the type of banner, aesthetics,
or messages; therefore, allowing a banner to promote Pepsi that's sold on a
weekly special would also allow a downtown merchant to use a banner to
advertise his place of business. It would also allow all types of print styles and
qualities of banners, some of which could result in visual blight. Adding
signage at a rate of 30 sq ft per property would serve to detract from the
effectiveness of the signs already in existence and, therefore, diminish the
value of the signs presently in place. Planning Commission should study this
issue carefully before making any changes. It may not make sense to amend
the ordinance because the rules currently protect individual businesses from
what a neighboring business might do.
Q'N eill outlined the alternatives for the Planning Commission to consider as
follows:
.
1.
Review the matter and take no action.
2. Motion to call for a public hearing on an ordinance amendment which
would allow greater use of temporary signs by providing more special
events or longer special event periods.
3. Motion to call for a public hearing on an ordinance amendment that
would allow full-time use of banners and temporary signs.
Acting Chairperson, Cindy Lemm, then opened the public hearing.
Dorothy Ritze, part owner of the Total Mart stores, explained her reasons for
requesting an update to the present zoning ordinance to allow additional time
per calendar year for the use of banners and temporary signs. Banners and
temporary signs are used as a promotional tool to attract the public from the
highway, which is a major portion of their business. She also suggested that
Planning Commission consider a temporary interim period for the use of
banners and portable signs.
.
Page 2
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 12/1/92
Kevin Olson, Manager of Wests ide Market, explained that a convenience store
attracts business by drawing the public from the highway for the products in
the store.
Don Grewe, owner of Downtown Standard, feels that the ordinance is too
restrictive in allowing a portable sign for only two weeks per calendar year.
Dorothy Ritze explained that the banners the City currently has up puts across
an effective message, which the City is using for the promotion of the city of
Monticello.
Patty Olsen, realtor with Edina Realty, asked if the convenience stores have
used up their maximum pylon and wall sign square footage? City staff
responded that they have used all of their existing wall and pylon sign square
footage allowances.
Dorothy Ritze explained that purchasing a reader board or message center type
of sign is fine but very expensive, in the neighborhood of $2,700 just to have
a small fastbank sign at their business. It is proposed to have one installed
at their business.
.
The manager of the Pump N Munch convenience store questioned why
additional signage for items such as lottery tickets, a promotional banner, copy
machine service, or a specific product inside the store could not also be allowed
on their building.
Richard Carlson questioned what is the City's ultimate goal by regulating the
use of portable signs and banners. Staff's response was that the ultimate goal
is to have a banner and portable sign ordinance in place that can be effectively
administered by City staff.
Carlson also commented, from a business standpoint, that it makes sense to
regulate signage within a commercial business. Too much signage distracts
from the overall appearance of the establishment.
The consensus of the Planning Commission members was to have City staff
research further portable signs and banners in surrounding communities and
some metro communities and return to the Planning Commission with a formal
list of alternatives.
1. To review the information provided and take no action.
.
2.
Consider the information presented, select the proposed
alternatives for an ordinance amendment, and call for a public
hearing at the next regularly scheduled meeting in February.
Page 3
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes - 12/V92
4.
There being no further business, a motion was made by Richard Carlson and
seconded by Richard Martie to adjourn the meeting. The meeting adjourned
at 8:21 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
4;40/~
Gary Anderson
Zoning Administrator
Page 4