Loading...
City Council Minutes 01-6-2009 Special Joint Planning CommissionMINUTES SPECIAL MEETING -JOINT WORKSHOP MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION January 6th, 2009 City Council Members Present: Clint Herbst, Tom Perrault, Glen Posusta, and Susie Wojchouski City Council Members Absent: Brian Stumpf Planning Commission Present: Rod Dragsten, Charlotte Gabler, Lloyd Hilgart, Bill Spartz, Barry Voight Planning Commission Members Absent: None 1. Call to order. The meeting convened at 5:10 PM with a full quorum of the Planning Commission and a number of City Council present. 2. Consideration to review and discuss a draft amendment to Chapter 3 of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance related to signs. Community Development Director Angela Schumann provided an introduction to the workshop. Schumann explained that the Planning Commission had called for an amendment to the Sign Ordinance in advance of an anticipated full scale ordinance revision due to the number of variance requests and inconsistencies within that portion of the code. Schumann noted that two public meetings had been held to gather input for the preparation of a draft amendment. Subsequently, the Planning Commission held two agenda item discussions on the prepared draft. The Commission recommended changes during those meetings, which are reflected in the version distributed to the Planning Commission and Council for this workshop. Additionally, Schumann related that a presentation to the Government Affairs Committee of the Chamber of Commerce was held and additional feedback had been garnered during that session. Schumann stated that the purpose of the workshop was to provide an overview of the proposed draft sign ordinance to the City Council and to allow the Council members a chance to ask questions and provide feedback. Consulting Planner Steve Grittman provided a presentation highlighting the amendment process to date and the primary changes to the sign ordinance. Grittman stated that the sign ordinance would become a separate chapter of the Zoning Ordinance, rather than a chapter included in the ordinance itself. He noted that the intent of the revision is also to make the ordinance more readable and user-friendly for property owners, staff and City officials. Grittman stated that in terms of the structure, the proposed ordinance now includes a set of definitions, a purpose statement, and a listing of permitted and prohibited signs. Then two sets of regulations are conveyed, those for residential, and those for commercial industrial. Grittman noted that the two areas of most change were in relationship to temporary signage and dynamic signage. The ordinance provides expanded flexibility for temporary signage through sandwich boards and use of the Public/Semi-Public District for non- profit temporary signage. In terms of dynamic displays, the ordinance provides additional detail encompassing today's technologic advances in signs. Grittman explained that the Planning Commission was not unanimous on some of the provisions of the dynamic display regulation. It was also noted that the draft ordinance does provide some incentive clauses as related to message boards and monument signage. Grittman concluded by stating that the next step would be to incorporate tables and graphic illustrations into the document where noted, then to bring that draft to another public comment session. Pending outcomes of that session, the draft would go to Planning Commission in a public hearing and finally to the City Council. Grittman opened the workshop to questions and comments. Bill Seefeldt, owner of Electro Industries, Monticello, addressed the Council and Commission, requesting clarification on where "uniformity" discussed by Grittman was conveyed within the new ordinance. Grittman responded that the uniformity comes in the way that commercial and industrial districts are addressed and how the regulations are applied. Councilmember Posusta inquired about the City's ability to regulate proper orientation of signage. Grittman indicated that was most likely a content issue, which falls under 1St Amendment protections. He indicated that it is a gray area. Posusta also asked for clarification on sandwich board placement and timing. Grittman noted that this ordinance allows sandwich boards to be placed out every day during hours of operation for each business. In essence, each tenant of amulti-tenant building could have its own sandwich board in addition to sharing the 40 days per building of temporary sign allowance. Charlie Pfeffer, Pfeffer Companies of Maple Grove, inquired about provisions for pylon signage. Grittman responded that pylon signage is still allowed and that the freeway bonus district allowing for additional heights for freeway exposure purposes had been retained in this draft. Schumann stated that the draft ordinance would be placed online and that notice of a public forum on the ordinance would be posted on line and in the newspaper. 3. Adiourn With no further comments, the meeting was adjourned at 5:50 PM. Recording Secretary