9. Amendment to City Code Sign OrdinanceCITY OF 9
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE 0 P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
MEMORANDUM
n�' r r ^. +- +iR�s =ra•ar
TO:
Don Ashworth, City Manager
V -_.
FROM:
John Rask, Planner I
DATE:
December 7, 1994
-- �.____ .
Da te T;
SUBJ:
Sign Ordinance
BACKGROUND
During the past two years, staff, Planning Commission, and members of the business
community have been working on changes to the sign ordinance. The original draft was
developed with a subcommittee that included a member from the City Council, Planning
Commission, and two Chamber members. Our most recent efforts included three work
sessions with the Planning Commission and Chamber of Commerce. A number of changes
have been incorporated into the attached draft ordinance.
ANALYSIS
Attached is the original issue paper for the sign ordinance as well as the proposed amended
ordinance. One issue that was closely examined was the relationship between the size of the
building and scale of the sign. be ordinance *as .rewri to include tables which base the
size of the sign on the size of ibe wall. Nall signs are .still limited to 15 percent of the total
wall area, but the maximum sign area of 80 square feet has been increased 'based on the size
of the wall area. The maximum sign area would be 240 square feet under the proposed
amendment. This provision should reduce the need for lager ;ding users to obtain
variances for the construction of a reasonable size sign.
A similar approach was used to relate the size;,nf pylon and monument signs to the size of
the principal structure for the business. Monument signs are limited to a maximum of 10 feet
in height with 80 square feet in sign area. Pylon signs would be limited to properties that
directly abut state highway corridors only, and limited to a maximum of 20 feet in height
with 80 square feet in sign area. Both of these maximum sign areas would be for buildings
in excess of 50,000 square feet. The maximum size of sign area allowed did not change from
L�
Don Ashworth
December 7, 1994
Page 2
the original ordinance. The only difference is that smaller buildings will be allowed less
signage under the proposed ordinance.
An amendment concerning window signage was added to the ordinance. The proposed
amendment would limit the amount of window signage as a percentage of the total window
area. Window signs shall not cover more than 50 percent of the total window area in which
they are located under the proposed amendment. Buildings with less than 32 square feet of
window area would be exempt from this provision. A cap was also added to the total
window sign square footage permitted based on the total wall sign area formula permitted for
the building. Thus, the amount of window signage cannot exceed the total wall sign area
permitted for the building The current sign ordinance does limit the use of window signs.
Permit standards for the use of temporary signs, searchlights, and banners have been revised
in the ordinance amendment. The size of banners is not limited in the current ordinance. As
proposed, the new ordinance would limit the size of a banner to 140 square feet. Banners
and portable signs are currently allowed for no more than 10 consecutive days with no more
than three permits per business during any calendar year. This was not changed in the
proposed draft. However, banners and portable signs would be.allowed for a 30 day display
period to coincide with the grand opening of a business or new development. Searchlights
would still be allowed under the new ordinance, but would be limited to 3 occasions per year
with each occasion not to exceed 2 days. In addition, the amendment states that searchlights
may not be illuminated between the hours of 12:00 midnight and 6:00 a.m..
' The above amendments represent the more significant changes to the ordinance. A number of
other minor amendments were made throughout the ordinance for clarification purposes. In
addition, several other minor changes were made to setback requirements, sign location, and
' the length of time temporary real estate and development signs are permitted. The proposed
amendments also improve the overall layout of the sign ordinance. Definitions, illustrations,
' standards, and district requirements have been combined within the sign ordinance to make
for a more "user friendly" document which is easier to interpret and administer.
' PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE
On November 16, 1994 the Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed
' ordinance amendment with a unanimous vote. Nancy Mancino and Ron Nutting were absent.
The major issues discussed during the work sessions and public hearings have been listed
' above. A separate issue which was discussed during the public hearing involved the
unnecessary duplication of signage. More specifically, should color bands on buildings,
certain architectural features, color scheme of buildings, etc. be considered as signage. The
' Planning Commission did not include standards, in the sign ordinance, regulating the use of
certain architectural features. However, the Commission is recommending the City Council
Don Ashworth
December 7, 1994
Page 3
review the architectural standards in the Highway 5 overlay district and other city ordinances
to determine if standards regulating the use of color bands and other architectural features as
signage, should be included in a separate city wide ordinance. For the purpose of the sign
ordinance, color bands, architectural features associated with company logos, and the color
scheme of a building will not be considered as signage.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council adopt the attached amendment to the sign ordinance.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Sign Ordinance amendment.
2. Memo from Kate Aanenson dated January 10, 1992, Issue Paper /Sign Ordinance.
3. Planning Commission minutes dated November 16, 1994.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
' ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE
' THE ZONING ORDINANCE
' The City Council of the City of Chanhassen ordains:
Section 1 . Article XXVI of the Chanhassen City Code is hereby amended in its
' entirety as follows:
ARTICLE XXVI. SIGNS
' DIVISION 1. GENERALLY
' Sec. 20 -1251. PURPOSE AND FINDINGS.
' A. Purpose
' The purpose of this sign ordinance is intended to establish an effective means of
communication in the city, maintain and enhance the aesthetic environment and the city's
ability to attract sources of economic development and growth, to improve pedestrian and
' traffic safety, to minimize the possible adverse effect of signs on nearby public and
private property, and to enable the fair and consistent enforcement of these sign
regulations. It is the intent of this section, to promote the health, safety, general welfare,
' aesthetics, and image of the community by regulating signs that are intended to
communicate to the public, and to use signs which meet the city's goals:
' (1) establish standards which permit businesses a reasonable and equitable opportunity
to advertise their name and service
' (2) preserve and promote civic beauty, and prohibit signs which detract from this
objective because of size, shape, height, location, condition, cluttering or
illumination;
(3) ensure that signs do not create safety hazards.
' (4) ensure that signs are designed, constructed, installed and maintained in a manner
that does not adversely impact public safety or unduly distract motorists;
' (5) preserve and protect property values;
(6) ensure signs that are in proportion to the scale of, and are architecturally I
compatible with the principal structures;
(7) limit temporary commercial signs and advertising displays which provide an
opportunity for grand opening and occasional sales events while restricting signs
which create continuous visual clutter and hazards at public right -of -way
intersections.
B. Findings
The City of Chanhassen finds it is necessary for the promotion and preservation of the
public health, safety, welfare and aesthetics of the community that the construction,
location, size and maintenance of signs be controlled. Further the city finds:
1. permanent and temporary signs have a direct impact on, and a relationship, to the
image of the community;
2. the manner of installation, location and maintenance of signs affects the public
health, safety, welfare and aesthetics of the community;
3. an opportunity for a viable identification of community business and institutions
must be established;
4. the safety of motorists, cyclists, pedestrians and other users of public streets and
property is affected by the number, size, location and appearance of signs that
unduly divert the attention of drivers;
5. installation of signs suspended from, projecting over, or placed on the tops of
buildings, walks or other structures may constitute a hazard during periods of high
winds and an obstacle to effective fire fighting and other emergency service;
6. uncontrolled and unlimited signs adversely impact the image and aesthetic
attractiveness of the community and, thereby, undermine economic value and
grog
7. uncontrolled and unlimited signs, particularly temporary signs, which are
commonly located within or adjacent to public right -of -way, or are located at
driveway /street intersections, result in roadside clutter and obstruction of views of
oncoming traffic. This creates a hazard to drivers and pedestrians and also
adversely impacts a logical flow of information.
2
1
i
L
' Sec. 20 -1252. Permit and variance fees.
' Fees for sign permit applications and variance requests shall be imposed in accordance
with the fee schedule established by City Council resolution. The intent of this section is to
recover costs associated with administering this ordinance. Permit fees shall reflect the costs of
reviewing and processing permits, as well as costs associated with periodic enforcement activities
and compliance checks. The fee schedule will be adjusted as costs change or as directed by City
Council resolution.
I Sec. 20 -1253. Variances.
The City Council, upon the recommendation of the Planning Commission, may grant a
' variance from the requirements of this article where it is shown that by reason of topography or
other conditions, strict compliance with the requirements of this article would cause a hardship;
provided that a variance may be granted only if the variance does not adversely affect the spirit
' or intent of this article. Written application for a variance shall be filed with the Planning
Department and shall be supplemented with reproducible copies of the proposed sign. The
application shall be processed in conformance with the public hearing requirements dictated for
' variances in Section 20 -29. No variance shall be granted by the City Council unless it has
received the affirmative vote of at least simple majority of the full City Council.
r
F�
r
Sec. 20 -1254. Permit generally.
(a) Except as provided in Section 20 -1255, no sign or sign structure shall be erected,
constructed, altered, rebuilt or relocated until a permit has first been issued by the
city.
(b) The following information for a sign permit shall be supplied by an applicant if
requested by the city:
(1) Name, address and telephone number of person making application.
(2) A site plan to scale showing the location of lot lines, building structures,
parking areas, existing and proposed signs and any other physical features.
(3) Plans, location, specifications, materials, method of construction and
attachment to the buildings or placement method in the ground.
(4) Copy of stress sheets and calculations.
3
(5) Written consent of the owner or lessee of any site on which the sign is to
be erected.
(6) Any electrical permit required and issued for the sign.
(7) Such other information as the city shall require to show full compliance
with this chapter and all other laws and ordinances of the city.
Information may include such items as color and material samples.
(8) Receipt of sign permit fee.
(9) The Planning Director, upon the filing of any application for a permit,
shall examine such plans, specifications, and other data. If the proposed
sign complies with this article and other applicable ordinances, the city
shall issue a sign permit unless City Council approval is required. If City
Council approval is required, the matter shall be promptly referred to the
council for action.
Sec. 20 -1255. Signs allowed without permit.
The following signs are allowed without a permit:
(1) Political Campaign signs: Temporary political campaign signs are permitted
according to the following:
a. Signs may be permitted from August 1, in a state general election year,
until ten (10) days following the state general election.
b. The sign must contain the name of the person responsible for such sign,
and that person shall be responsible for its removal.
C. Signs are not permitted in the public right -of -way.
d. Shall comply with the fair campaign practices act contained in the State
of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 211B.045.
e. The city shall have the right to remove and destroy signs not conforming
to this paragraph.
4
F1
I I
n
Directional signs.
a. On- premises signs shall not be larger than four (4) square feet. The
maximum height of the sign shall not exceed five (5) feet from the ground.
The placement of directional signs on the property shall be so located such
that the sign does not adversely affect adjacent properties (including site
lines or confusion of adjoining ingress or egress) or the general
appearance of the site from public rights -of -way. No more than four (4)
signs shall be allowed per site. The City Council may allow additional
signs in situations where access is confusing or traffic safety could be
jeopardized.
b. Off - premises signs shall be allowed only in situations where access is
confusing and traffic safety could be jeopardized or traffic could be
inappropriately routed through residential streets. The size of the sign
shall be no larger than what is needed to effectively view the sign from the
roadway and shall be approved by the City Council.
C. On- premises signs for industrially zoned land in excess of forty (40) acres
shall not exceed twelve (12) square feet. The maximum height of the sign
shall not exceed five (5) feet from the ground. The placement of
directional signs on the property shall be sdlocated such that the sign does
not adversely affect adjacent properties or the general appearance of the
site from public right -of -way. No more than four (4) signs shall be
allowed per site. The City Council may allow additional signs in
situations where access is confusing or traffic safety could be jeopardized.
d. Bench signs are prohibited except at designated transit stops as authorized
by the local transit authority.
(3) Community Signs or displays which contain or depict a message pertaining to a
religious, national, state or local holiday or event and no other matter, and which
are displayed for a period not to exceed forty (40) days in any calendar year.
(4) Motor fuel price signs are permitted on the premises of any automobile service
station or convenience store selling fuel, only if such signs are affixed to the fuel
pumps or are made an integral part of a ground low profile or pylon business sign
otherwise permitted in that zoning district. Motor fuel price signs affixed to a fuel
pump shall not exceed four (4) square feet in sign display area. When such signs
are made an integral part of a freestanding business sign, the sign display area
devoted to the price component shall not exceed thirty (30) percent of the total
sign display area of the sign.
5
(5) Nameplate or integral signs not exceeding two (2) square feet per building and I
does not include multi -tenant names.
(6) Non - illuminated construction signs confined to the site of the construction,
alteration or repair. Such a sign must be removed within one (1) year from the
date of issuance of the first building permit on the site, and may be extended until
the project is completed. One (1) sign shall be permitted for each street the
project abuts. Commercial and industrial signs may not exceed fifty (50) square
feet in sign area, and residential construction signs may not exceed twenty -four
(24) square feet in sign area.
(7) Signs of a public, non - commercial nature, informational signs erected by a
governmental entity or agency, including safety signs (O.S.H.A.), directional signs
to public facilities, trespassing signs, traffic signs, signs indicating scenic or
historical points of interest, memorial plaques and the like. Signs shall not exceed
sixteen (16) square feet.
(8) Rummage (garage) sale signs. Rummage sale signs shall be removed within two
(2) days after the end of the sale and shall not exceed four (4) square feet.
Rummage sale signs shall not be located in any public rights -of -way. The city
shall have the right to remove and destroy signs not conforming to this paragraph.
The city may assess a fee in the amount established by resolution for each sign
removed by the city.
(9) Temporary development project advertising signs erected for the purpose of selling
or promoting any non - residential project, or any residential project of ten (10) or
more dwelling units, located in the City of Chanhassen, shall be permitted subject
to the following regulations:
a. Not more than two (2) non - illuminated signs or not more than one (1) non-
illuminated sign per street frontage shall be allowed per project.
b. Such signs shall only be located along streets that provide primary access
to the project site.
C. Such sign shall be setback at least ten (10) feet from any property line for
signs ten (10) feet in height or less, plus one additional foot for each
additional foot of sign height. Signs shall be firmly anchored to the
ground.
d. No such sign shall be located closer than one hundred (100) feet from an
existing residential dwelling unit, church, or school which is not a part of
the project being so advertised.
0
e. Such signs shall not be located closer than one hundred (100) feet from
any other such sign located on the same _side of the street.
(10)
f. Sign display area shall not exceed sixty -four (64) square feet, and the
height of such signs shall not exceed fifteen (15) feet.
g. Such signs shall be removed when the project being advertised is sold or
leased, or after three (3) years. The Planning Director may permit a sign
for longer than 3 years if the project being advertised is not sold or leased.
Temporary real estate signs which advertise the sale, rental or lease of real estate
subject to the following conditions:
a. On premises real estate signs advertising the sale, rental or lease of the
premises upon which the sign is located.
1. One (1) non - illuminated sign is permitted per street frontage.
2. Sign display area shall not exceed sixteen (16) square feet per sign
on property containing less than ten (10) acres in area, and thirty-
two (32) square feet per sign on property containing ten (10) or
more acres.
3. No such sign shall exceed ten (10) feet in overall height, nor be
located less than ten (10) feet from any property line.
4. All temporary real estate signs shall be removed within seven (7)
days following sale, lease, or rental of the property.
5. Window signs advertising the sale, rental, or lease of a building are
permitted subject to the conditions of Sec. 20- 1265(8).
b. Off - premises real estate signs advertising the sale, rental or lease of
business and industrial buildings:
1. One (1) non - illuminated sign is permitted per building.
2. Such signs shall only be permitted in business and industrial
districts, and on property located within the same subdivision or
development as the building being advertised.
3. Such signs shall not be located closer one hundred (100) feet from
any other such sign located on the same side of the street.
7
I �
u
4. Sign display area shall not exceed thirty-two (32) square feet, and
the height of such signs shall not exceed ten (10) feet.
5. Such sign shall be setback at least ten (10) feet from any property
line.
6. Such signs shall be removed within seven (7) days following the
lease or sale of the building floor space which it is advertising.
7. Provide written permission of property owner.
C. Off- premises directional signs which show direction to new residential
developments in accordance with the following. The intent of this
subparagraph is to allow short term signage, for residential development,
to familiarize the public with the new development.
1. Such sign shall only be permitted along major arterials and
collectors as identified in the comprehensive plan.
2. Only one (1) sign per corner of an intersection per development
shall be permitted. There shall not be more than 4 signs per
intersection. Signs shall not be located in any site distance
triangle, measured thirty (30) feet from the point of intersection of
the property line.
3. Sign display area shall not exceed thirty-two (32) square feet and
the height of such signs shall not exceed ten (10) feet.
4. Such sign shall not be located closer than ten (10) feet from any
street right -of -way line, and shall be firmly anchored to the ground.
5. Written permission must be obtained from the property owner upon
whose land the proposed sign is to be located.
6. Such sign shall be non- illuminated and kept in good condition.
7. Such sign shall be removed twelve (12) months after the sign has
been erected. A sign shall be permitted for each phase of a
development.
8. Signs for home promotions (Parade of Homes, Spring Preview,
etc.) shall be limited to four (4) square feet and shall be permitted
only for the duration of the event.
8
r
n
0
7
Sec. 20 -1256. Permit for temporary signs, searchlights, banners, etc.
Temporary signs are permitted as follows:
1. Banners shall not exceed one hundred forty (140) square feet and portable signs
shall not exceed thirty-two (32) square feet and shall meet the following standards:
a. a thirty (30) day display period to coincide with the grand opening of a
business or a new development (business park or shopping center), or a
business may display a banner or portable sign on three occasions per
calendar year with a maximum 10-day display period for each occasion.
b. messages must relate to on- premise products or services, or any non-
commercial message; and
C. banners must be affixed to a principal structure which is owned or leased
by the business which the sign is advertising. Non -profit and
governmental event banners are excluded from this provision.
d. portable signs shall not be located in the public right -of -way.
e. sign permit issued by city.
2. Inflatable advertising devices are permitted according to the following:
a. for each site or center, two occasions per calendar year, with each occasion
not to exceed seven (7) days;
b. written authorization from the property owner or their designee must be
submitted with the sign permit application.
C. sign permit issued by city.
d. maximum height of the inflatable shall be twenty -five (25) feet.
3. Flashing or blinking portable signs, stringers, and pennants are not permitted.
4. Large flags flown in high winds may cause a noise nuisance and are subject to
removal upon complaint from residents or businesses.
E
5. The use of searchlights shall be limited to three (3) occasions per year, with each
occasion not to exceed two (2) days. The use of searchlights shall be controlled
in such a way so as not to become a nuisance. Searchlights may not be
illuminated between the hours of twelve (12:00) midnight and six o'clock (6:00)
a.m.
Sec. 20 -1258. Legal Action.
If the City Planning Director or an administrative officer finds that any sign regulated by
this division is prohibited as to size, location, content, type, number, height or method of
construction; or erected without a permit first being granted to the installer of the sign to the
owner of the property upon which the sign has been erected or is improperly maintained, or is
in violation of any other provision of this chapter, he shall give written notice of such violation
to the owner or perminee thereof. If the permittee or owner fails to remove or alter the sign so
as to comply with the provisions set forth in this chapter within (10) calendar days following
receipt of said notice:
(1) Such permittee or owner may be prosecuted for violating this chapter and if
convicted shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Each day a violation exists shall
constitute a separate offense.
Sec. 20 -1259. Prohibited signs.
The following signs are prohibited:
(1) Advertising or business signs on or attached to equipment, such as semi -truck
trailers, where signing is a principal use of the equipment on either a temporary
or permanent basis.
(2) Motion signs and flashing signs, except time and temperature signs and barber
poles which may be permitted by conditional use permits (see sections 20 -231
through 20 -237).
1
0
7
(3) Projecting signs, not including awning or canopies as defined in this ordinance. I
(4) Roof signs, except that a business sign may be placed on the roof, facia or
marquee of a building provided it does not extend above the highest elevation of
the building, excluding chimneys, and provided:
10
a. Roof signs shall be thoroughly secured and anchored to the frames of the
building over which they are constructed and erected.
b. No portion of roof signs shall extend beyond the periphery of the roof.
(5) Wall graphics and design treatments depicting corporate logos and company
symbols.
(6) Temporary signs or banners except as permitted in Section 20 -1256.
(7) Signs which are placed or tacked on trees, fences, utility poles or in the public
right-of-way.
(8) Bench signs are prohibited except at designated transit stops as authorized by the
local transit authority.
(9) Billboards are prohibited.
Sec. 20 -1260. Nonconforming Signs.
When the principal use of land is legally non - conforming under this chapter, all existing
or proposed signs in conjunction with that land, shall be considered conforming if they are in
compliance with the sign provisions for the most restrictive zoning district in which the principal
use is allowed.
Excluding normal maintenance, face changes, and repair, a non - conforming sign shall not
be moved, altered or enlarged unless it is brought into compliance with the sign regulations.
Sec. 20 -1265. General location restrictions.
' (a) No sign or sign structure shall be closer to any lot line than a distance equal to
one -half (1/2) the minimum required yard setback. Sign shall not block site
distance triangle from any private drive or access. Signs shall not be located in
' any site distance triangle thirty (30) feet from the point of intersection of the
property line.
11
(b) Signs on adjacent non - residential property shall be positioned so that the copy is
not visible from residential uses or districts along adjoining side and rear yard
property lines.
(c) No sign, other than governmental signs, shall be erected or placed upon any public
street, right -of -way, or project over public property. Temporary signs may not
be erected or placed in a public easement unless approved by the city.
(d) Signs shall not create a hazard to the safe, efficient movement of vehicular or
pedestrian traffic. No private sign shall contain words which might be construed
as traffic controls, such as "Stop," "Caution," "Warning," unless the sign is
intended to direct traffic on the premises.
(e) No signs, guys, stays or attachments shall be erected, placed or maintained on
rocks, fences or trees nor, interfere with any electric light, power, telephone or
telegraph wires or the supports thereof.
(f) No sign or sign structure shall be erected or maintained that prevents free ingress
or egress from any door, window or fire escape. No sign or sign structure shall
be attached to a standpipe or fire escape.
(g) Window signs shall not cover more than fifty (50) percent of the total window
area in which they are located: The area of a window sign shall be interpreted as
the total window area for that face of the building. In no case shall the total
window sign area exceed the permitted wall sign area defined in this ordinance
for said district. Buildings with less than thirty-two (32) square feet of window
area are exempt from this provision.
Sec. 20 -1266. Maintenance and repair.
Signs and sign structures shall be properly maintained and kept in a safe condition. Sign
or sign structures which are rotted, unsafe, deteriorated or defaced shall be repainted, repaired
replaced, or removed by the licensee, owner or agent of the building upon which the sign stands
immediately upon notification by the city. If the permittee or owner fails to remove or alter the
sign so as to comply with the provisions set forth in this chapter within thirty (30) calendared
days following receipt of written notice:
(1) Such permittee or owner may be prosecuted for violating this chapter and if
convicted shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Each day a violation exists shall
constitute a separate offense.
12
C
7
All signs shall be subject to inspection by the Building Official, or any other official of
' the city who may be appointed by him, to ascertain if the provisions of this chapter are being
met.
J
I
LI
Sec. 20 -1267. Uniformity of construction, design, etc.
All permanent signs shall be designed and constructed in a uniform manner and, to the
extent possible, as an integral part of the building's architecture. Multi-tenant commercial and
industrial buildings shall have uniform signage. When buildings or developments are presented
for site plan review, proposed signs for the development should be presented concurrently for
staff review. All planned centers and multi-tenant buildings all submit a comprehensive sign plan
for approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. Signage shall use individual
dimensional letters and logos, be back lit if a wall sign is illuminated, and be architecturally
compatible with the building and other signage if in a multi-tenant building. Company symbols,
display messages, pictorial presentations, illustrations, or decorations (anything other than
wording) shall not occupy more than fifteen percent (15 %) of the sign display area.
Sec. 20 -1268. Noncommercial speech.
Signs containing noncommercial speech are permitted anywhere that signs are permitted,
subject to the same size regulations applicable to such signs.
Sec. 20 -1270. Uniform Sign Code.
The design and construction standards asset forth in Chapter 4 of the 1994 Edition of the
Uniform Sign Code as may be amended, are adopted.
Sec. 20 -1275. Construction Standards.
(a) A free standing sign or sign structure shall be constructed so that if the faces are
not back to back, then they shall not have an angle separating the faces exceeding
13
forty -five (45) degrees unless the total area of both sides added together does not
exceed the maximum allowable sign area for that district.
45 degree maximum angle
(b) All on- premise freestanding signs must have structural supports covered or
concealed with pole covers. The actual structural supports should not be exposed,
and the covers should be architecturally and aesthetically designed to match the
building. Pole covers shall be a minimum height of (eight) 8 feet The exposed
uprights, superstructure and/or backside of all signs shall be painted a neutral color
such as light blue gray, brown, or white, unless it can be illustrated that such part
of the sign designed or painted in another manner is integral to the overall design
of the sign.
8' min.
S 8' min.
(c) The installation of electrical signs shall be subject to the National Electrical Code
as adopted and amended by the city. Electrical service to such sign shall be
underground.
(d) No sign shall be attached or be allowed to hang from any building until all
necessary wall and roof attachments have been approved by the building official.
Any canopy or awning sign shall have a minimum of an eight (8) foot clearance.
(e) Illuminated signs shall be shielded to prevent lights from being directed at
oncoming traffic in such brilliance that it impairs the vision of the driver. No
such signs shall interfere with or_ obscure an official traffic sign or signal; this
includes indoor signs which are visible from public streets. Illumination for a sign
or groups of signs shall not exceed �i foot candle in brightness as measured at the
property line.
14
1
1
Ll
J
C
u
DIVISION 2. SIGNS ALLOWED IN SPECIFIC DISTRICTS BY PERMIT
Sec. 20 -1301. Agricultural and Residential Districts.
The following signs are allowed by permit in the A -2, RR, RSF, R-4, R -8, R -12 and
residential PUD districts:
(1) Public and Institutional Signs. One (1) ground low profile or wall sign, not
exceeding twenty -four (24) square feet of sign display area, shall be permitted on
the premises of any public or institutional property giving the name of the facility
and nature of the use and occupancy. Such sign shall be located at least ten (10)
feet from any property line, and shall not exceed five (5) feet in height.
(2) Area Identification/Entrance signs. Only one (1) monument sign may be erected
on a lot, which shall not exceed twenty -four (24) squam feet of sign display area,
nor be more than five feet high. Any such sign or monument shall be designed
so that it is maintenance free. The adjacent property owner or a Homeowners
Association shall be responsible for maintenance of the identification/entrance
sign. Such sign shall be located so as not to conflict with traffic visibility or street
maintenance operations, and shall be securely anchored to the ground.
Sec. 20 -1302. Neighborhood Business, Fringe Business, and Office & Institutional Districts.
The following signs shall be allowed by permit in any OI, BF, or BN Districts:
1. Ground low profile business signs. One (1) ground low profile business or
institutional sign not exceeding twenty -four (24) square feet of sign display area
shall be permitted. Such sign shall be located at least ten (10) feet from any
property line and shall not exceed five (5) feet in height
2. Wall business signs. One (1) wall business sign shall be permitted on the street
frontage for each business occupant within a building. Wall business signs shall
not be mounted upon the wall of any building which faces any adjoining
residential district without an intervening public street The total of all wall
mounted sign display areas for each business shall not exceed the square footage
established in the following table:
15
Maximum Percentage
of Wall
Wall Area in Square Feet
Total Square
Footage of Signs
15%
0 -600
90
13%
601 -1,200
156
11%
1,201 -1,800
198
9%
1,801 -2,400
216
7%
2,401 -3,200
224
1 230
5%
3,201 -4,500
Less than
3%
4,500+
240
3. Wall signs shall not include product advertising. Wall signs shall only include
tenant identification, tenant logo or registered trademark, center name, or any
combination of the three.
Sec. 20 -1303. Highway, General Business Districts and Central Business District.
The following signs shall be allowed by permit in any BE, BG, or CBD District:
The following table lists the standards for freestanding and ground low profile signs in
the BH, BG, or CBD zone.
PYLON
GROUND LOW PROFILE
Principal
Height
Sign size
Height
Sign Size
Structure
(feet)
(sq. ft.)
(feet)
(sq. ft.)
50,000 sq. ft.
20
80
10
80
or greater
Less than
16
64
8
64
50,000 sq. ft.
L.
1. Pylon business sign. Pylon Signs are permitted on parcels that abut State
Highway corridors only. One (1) pylon identification sign shall be permitted.
16
' This sign may identify the name of the center of the major tenants. The height and
square footage of the sign shall be based on the square footage of the principal
structure as shown in the table. Such signs shall be located at least ten (10) feet
' from any property line.
2. Ground low profile business signs. One (1) ground low profile business sign shall
' be permitted per each outlot or separate building pad that has street frontage. The
height and square footage of the sign shall be based on the table above. Such
signs shall be located at least 300 feet from any other pylon or ground sign and
I at least ten (10) feet from any property line.
3. Wall business signs. Wall business signs shall be permitted on street frontage for
' each business occupant within a building only. The total of all wall mounted sign
display areas for each business shall not exceed the square footage established in
the following table:
Maximum Percentage
of Wall
Wall Area in Square Feet
Maximum Square
Footage of Sign
15%
0 -600
+90
13%
601 -1,200
156
11%
1,201 -1,800
198
9%
1,801 -2,400
216
7%
2,401 -3,200
224
5%
3,201 -4,500
230
3%
4,500 +
240
4. Menu Board. One (1) menu board sign per restaurant use is permitted with a drive-
' through facility. Such sign shall not exceed forty-five (45) square feet in size nor greater
than eight (8) feet in height. Such sign is permitted in addition to any other sign
permitted in the Zoning District.
17
Sec. 20 -1304. Industrial Office Park Signs.
The following signs shall be allowed by permit in any IOP District:
1. Pylon or ground low profile business signs. Pylon signs are permitted on parcels
that abut the Highway 5 corridor only. One (1) pylon or one (1) ground low
profile Industrial Office Park identification sign shall be permitted. A Pylon sign
shall not exceed eighty (80) square feet in sign area and shall not exceed twenty
(20) feet in height. A ground low profile may not exceed eighty (80) square feet
and eight (8) feet in height. Such sign shall be located at least ten (10) feet from
any property line.
2. Ground low profile business signs. One (1) ground low profile business sign shall '
be permitted for each individual tenant. Such sign shall not exceed sixty-four (64)
square feet in sign display area nor be greater than eight (8) feet in height. Such
sign shall be located at least ten (10) feet from any property line. '
3. Wall business signs. Wall business signs shall be permitted on street frontage for '
each business occupant within a building only. The total of all wall mounted sign
display areas shall not exceed the square footage established in the following '
table:
Maximum Percentage
of Wall
Wall Area in Square Feet
Maximum Square
Footage of Sign
15%
0 -600
90
13%
601 -1,200
156
11%
1,201 -1,800
198
9%
1,801 -2,400
216
7%
2,401 -3,200
224
5%
3,2014,500
230
3%
4,500+
240
Secs. 20- 1306 -20 -1350. Reserved.
18
I Sec. 20-1 DEFINITIONS
' Sign means any object, device, display, or structure, or part thereof situated outdoors, or visible
through a window or door, which is used to advertise, announce, identify, display, direct or
attract attention to an object, person, institution, organization, business, commodity, product,
' service, event or location, by means, including words, letters, figures, design, symbols, fixtures,
pictures, illumination or projected images.
' Sign, Advertising means any sign which directs attention to a business, commodity, service,
activity or entertainment not conducted, sold or offered upon the premises where such a sign is
located.
' Sign, Awning means a temporary hood or cover
that projects from the wall of a building,
' and which can be retracted, folded or collapsed
against the face of the supporting building.
Awning may extend in any required yard
setback a maximum of five (5) feet.
(2.6 feet in the supplementary regulations)
' Sign, Banner means a sign which is made out of a paper, cloth or plastic -like consistency,
affixed to a building, vehicle, poles, or other supporting structures by all four (4) comers.
' Sign, Business means a sign which directs attention to a business or profession conducted, or to
a commodity or service sold, offered or manufactured, or to an entertainment offered on the
' premises where the sign is located.
Sign, Business Directory means a sign which
' identifies the names of specific businesses
located in a shopping center, medical center
and professional office and which is located on
' the premises of the shopping center so identified.
Sign, Campaign means a temporary sign announcing, promoting, or supporting political
' candidates or issues in connection with any national, state, or local election.
Sign, Canopy - Any sign that is affixed to a
' projection or extension of a building or structure
of a building, erected in such as manner as to
provide a shelter or cover over the approach to CANOPY s N
' any entrance of a store, building or place of assembly.
plastic, or structural protective cover over a
door, entrance, window, or outdoor service area.
19
Sign, Changeable Copy, - a sign or portion thereof with characters, letters, or illustrations that
can be changed or rearranged without altering the face or the surface of the sign.
Sign, Construction means a temporary sign erected on the premises on which construction is
taking place, during the period of such construction, indicating the names of the architects,
engineers, landscape architects, contractors or similar artisans, and the owners, financial
supporters, sponsors, and similar individuals or firms having a role or interest with respect to the
situation or project.
Sign, Development Identification means a permanent ground low profile sign which identifies
a specific residential, industrial, commercial or office development and which is located on the
premises of the development which it identifies.
Sign, Directional means a sign erected on
private property for the purpose of EXXT
directing pedestrian or vehicular traffic
onto or about the property upon which such
sign is located, including signs marking
entrances and exits, circulation direction,
parking areas, and pickup and delivery areas.
Sign, Display Area means the area within a single
continuous perimeter enclosing the extreme limits DISPLAY
or the actual sign message surface, including any A RE A
structural elements outside the limits of each sign
forming an integral part of the sign. The stipulated
maximum sign display area for a sign refers to a
single facing.
Sign, Festive Flag /Banner - a flag or
banner constructed of cloth, canvas or
light fabric, that is hung from a light
pole. The flag/banner shall contain no
advertising except for cultural events,
special holidays /seasons, etc.
Sign, Flag - any fabric banner used as a symbol of a government political subdivision or other
identity. Corporation flags shall not exceed 12 square feet and may be flown in tandem with the
state or national flag.
Sign, Flashing means any directly or indirectly illuminated sign which exhibits changing natural
or artificial light or color effects by any means what so ever.
20
0
I
Sign, Freestanding /Pole /Pylon, means any non - movable sign not affixed to a building but erected
upon a pole, post or other similar support so that the bottom edge of the sign display area is eight
(8) feet or more above the ground elevation.
' Sign, Governmental means a sign erected and maintained pursuant to and in discharge of any
governmental functions, or required by law, ordinance or other governmental regulation.
Sign, Ground low profile business means a GROVNp
' business sign affixed directly to the ground, Low PROFILE
with the sign display area standing not
greater than two (2) feet above the ground.
Sign, Holiday decoration means a temporary sign in the nature of decorations, clearly incidental
' to and customarily and commonly associated with any national, local or religious holiday.
Sign, Home occupation means a sign containing only the name and occupation of a permitted
' home occupation not to exceed 2 square feet. This is also a nameplate sign.
Sign, Illuminated means a sign lighted by or exposed to artificial lighting either by lights on or
i in the sign or directed towards the sign.
' Sign, Informational means a sign containing descriptions of major points of interest, government
institutions or other public services such as hospitals, sports facilities, etc.
' Sign, Institutional means a sign which identifies the name and other characteristics of a public
or private institution of the site where the sign is located.
' Sign, Integral means a sign constructed as
to be an integral portion of the building
of which it forms a part.
F,
Sign, Integral Roof, means any sign
erected or constructed as an integral or
essentially integral part of a normal roof
structure of any design, such that no part
of the sign extends vertically above the
highest portion of the roof and such that
no part of the sign is separated from the
rest of the roof by a space of more than
six (6) inches.
ZZZA
21
0
Sign, Marquee means a sign which is mounted, painted on, or attached to any projection or
extension of a building that is designated in such a manner as to provide shelter or cover over
the approach to any entrance of the building. ,
Sign, Menu Board means a sign located adjacent to the drive - through lane that is used to
advertise the product available at a fast food restaurant. '
Sign, Motion means any sign or part of a sign which changes physical position by any movement
or rotation of which gives the visual impression of such movement or rotation. '
Sign, Nameplate means a sign, located on the premises, which bears the name and/or address of
the occupant of the building or premises. '
Sign, Non - Conforming, a sign that does not conform to the requirements of this ordinance.
sign which directs attention to a use, product, commodity ,
Sign, Off - Premise, an adve rtisi n g gn p tY or
services not related to the premises on which it is located.
'
Sign, On- Premise, a sign which directs attention to a business, commodity, product, use, service
or other activity which is sold,, offered or conducted on the premises upon which the sign is
located.
Sign, Portable, means a sign designed so as to be movable from one (1) location to another, and '
that is not permanently affixed to a building, structure, or the ground. Including but not limited
to, signs designed to be transported by means of wheels, sign converted to A- Frames, menu and
sandwich board signs, and signs attached to or painted on vehicles parked and visible from the ,
public right -of -way unless said vehicle is used in the normal day - to-day operations.
Sign, Private Sale or Event means a temporary sign advertising private sales or personal property
,
such as a house sale, garage sale and the like or private nonprofit events such as picnic, carnival,
bazaar, game night, art fair, or craft show.
Sign, Projecting means a sign that is wholly or partly dependent upon a building for support and
which projects more than twelve (12) inches from such building.
'
Sign, Real Estate means a sign pertaining to the sale or lease of the premises, or a portion of the
premises, on which the sign is located.
'
Si g n , Ro means a si p hat is mounted on
�
the roof of a building or which is wholly
dependent upon a building for support and
'
which projects above the roof line of a
building with a flat roof, the eave line
of a building with a gambrel, gable or hip
'
22 '
0
' roof or the deck line of a building with a
mansard roof.
' Sign, Temporary means a sign designed or
intended to be displayed for a short period
of time. This includes items such as banners,
' pennants, flags, beacons, sandwich, or
balloons or other air or gas filled figures.
'
Sign, Wall means a sign attached to or
erected against the wall of a building or
structure with the exposed face of the
'
sign in a plane approximately parallel
to the face of the wall, and which
does not project more than twelve (12)
'
inches from such building or structure.
Wall signs shall not include product
advertising. Wall signs shall include
'
tenant identification, tenant logo, center
name, or any combination of the three.
'
Sign, Window means sign, pictures, symbols,
or combination thereof, designed to
'
communicate information about an activity,
business, commodity, event, sale or service,
that is placed inside a window or upon the
window panes or glass and is visible from
'
the exterior of the window.
PROJECTS
ROOF 51GN
IGN!
VIN//
CM
' Site Distance Triangle means no sign or sign structure shall be closer to any lot line than a
distance equal to one -half (1/2) the minimum required yard setback. No sign shall be placed
within any drainage or utility easement. Sign shall not block site distance triangle from any
' private drive or access. Signs shall not be located in any site distance triangle thirty (30) feet
from the point of intersection of the property line.
' Section 2 . This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and
publication.
u
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this
day of , 1994.
23
ATTEST:
'
Don Ashworth, City Manager Donald J. Chmiel, Mayor
'
(Published in the Chanhassen Villager on
isnna
'
1
1
24
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Kate Aanenson, Planner II
DATE: January 10, 1992
SUBJ: Issue Paper /Sign Ordinance
' BACKGROUND
As previously discussed with the Planning Commission and the City
' Council, staff will be rewriting the Sign Ordinance. The intent of
the sign ordinance is to establish standards which permit business
a reasonable and equitable opportunity to advertise; while the city
' wants to preserve and promote civic beauty and limit the visual
clutter. This report is intended to give an overview of some major
areas where the ordinance could be modified.
GOALS
After review and input from the Planning Commission, a committee,
which has been established, will begin the review and rewrite
process. This Committee includes Councilman Tom Workman, Planning
Commissioner Jeff Farmakes, Kevin McShane of the Chanhassen Bank,
and Gene Borg of McDonalds. After the sign committee has spent
time rewriting the ordinance, their proposed changes will be
reviewed by the Chamber of Commerce and then presented to the
Planning Commission and City Council for their recommendations and
implementation.
One of the goals of the new ordinance should be that the ordinance
should be easy to interpret and enforce. And finally, the new
ordinance should be in a format where industry uses could have all
the standards in one place. This would require a document where
the definitions and standards as well as district requirements are
in one document.
ISSUES
The following constitutes our review of the existing ordinance and
brief discussion of the issues as we see them. We would ask the
0
Planning Commission
January 10, 1992
Page 2
Planning Commission to review the materials and provide any
additional guidance you feel is warranted. We would then pass the
information along to the Sign Ordinance Task Force so that they may
begin developing the ordinance.
n
0
0
Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
5. The applicant shall dedicate to the City on the final plat a 20 foot wide drainage and
utility easement over the existing drainage ditch.
6. Lot 2, Block 1 will be responsible for a hook up and connection change of $9993.42
(1994 figure) for connecting to municipal utilities. This fee will be payable at time of
building permit issuance. The fees may also be assessed.
7. The applicant shall escrow with the city $300.00 to cover the city attorney's time for
review and recording of the final plat.
8. Approval of the plat from the City of Victoria.
All voted in favor and the motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARLNG:
AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE. ARTICLE XXVI. REGARDING THE SIGN
ORDP ANCE.
Public Present:
Name Address
Randy Herman
2792 Piper Ridge Lane
Vernelle Clayton
422 Santa Fe Circle
Leonard Thiel
5643 Green Circle Drive
Roland Danielson
6209 Lockmoor Drive
John Rask presented the staff report on this item.
Scott: Questions or comments.
Harberts: I have a question. Who's your contact at Eden Prairie?
Rask: Gotchya.
Harberts: That dog. I take exception to the information he provided you. He's incorrect with
that.
Rask: Okay. He is.
F1
W
Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
Harberts: He is. He even sits on that commission.
Rask: Well he said I should tell you so.
Harberts: Pardon, what did he do?
Rask: He said tell Diane I told you so.
Harberts: Well I'll tell him something. Alright.
Scott. What is the correct info?
Harberts: Well there are benches around Eden Prairie. There's one at our site in Eden Prairie
that had advertising on it. Southwest Metro Transit has their own internal policy where they
do not allow any advertising at their park and ride sites. Bus shelters or anything. That's an
internal policy within Southwest Metro Transit. And I don't know if it was misunderstood or
whatever but I know in Eden Prairie there are benches through the American Bench Company
that have advertising on it so, but with regard to transit, it's a decision made solely by
Southwest Metro and not by the City of Eden Prairie.
Ledvina: Let me try to understand this. Then are those benches not allowed by ordinance
then or what? What is the situation?
Harberts: I don't know what Scott was talking about.
Ledvina: Are those against the ordinance then or what?
Rask: The way it's currently written, signs...bus benches in Eden Prairie. There aren't any
benches.
Ledvina: That is their ordinance? Okay.
Rask: That's the way I understood it.
Ledvina: Okay.
Farmakes: I'd like a clarification on page 13 where it talks about the, these features shall be
applied toward the maximum allowable sign area at the rate of one -third the architectural
feature area. What exactly does that mean?
3
Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
1.
'
Rask: It's talking about the color band. If those, if the bands say occupy 100 square feet of
the building area. If you take 1/3 of that. 33 feet would be taken away from the maximum
allowable signs. So if you had 150 square feet of sign area was allowed by ordinance, and
you had your color bands that occupied 100 square feet, you take 1/3 of that. You're at 33
feet and you'd subtract that. So then if you have a sign, wall sign would be allowed
'
approximately 117 square feet.
Farmakes: If we had a sign limited to say 80 feet on Taco Bell and attached to that sign, or
'
running up to that sign are large color bands of plastic. Are we defining that we only count
1/3 of that towards the maximum square footage of the signor?
Rask: Correct.
Farmakes: Okay. I was just wondering what the reasoning of 1/3. Why wouldn't we apply
'
100% to that?
Rask: Well I think that's all been, it's difficult to regulate some of these features within the
sign ordinance. It's better addressed through architectural revieyv standards ... on Highway 5
'
corridor into, to pull this into the sign ordinance makes it difficult.
' Farmakes: I served on both committees and it's sort of catch as catch can but in the
architectural committee they said, well we'll address that with the signage ordinance and now
we're saying we'll address that in the architectural stipulations so. If we discussed the issue
' of dealing and evaluating a structural tie in to signage. What you see currently, and Holiday
just redid their banding. If you're discussing that as an architectural feature, it's not. It's part
of signage. It's meant to be, have the building seen as a sign. So my point is, if we're going
' to apply the banding say around Holiday and get any type of moderation, if there isn't a cap
and allowing a vendor to have some discretion on how they use that, the interpretation of
putting bright stripes on a building. Saying it's really for the purpose to make the building
look better and not to attract. Or the intent of serving the purposes of a sign, what point are
we solving. We're not moderating anything. Because if we have like an 80 square foot
maximum to the wall sign and we're allowing them 1/3 of the architectural feature area, that
' may double that. Would it not? So what have we moderated?
Aanenson: We stumbled over this for 2 years. We've been asking for direction on this.
' We're not sure how to handle this. We're not sure if the architectural features are being... If
you want to include that as part of signage...
Farmakes: I think currently as I see in architectural, particularly in fast food operations and
gas, what you're seeing is the back lit striping and in some of the fast food areas, the back lit
' 6
0
Planning Commission Meeting • November 16, 1994
canopy area. That's where they're connecting with. Adding an architectural feature that is
imposing as a signage attraction and again, I don't know if the way to approach that is to
prohibit that or to moderate that on square footage or if it's to interpret, just list those items
and say that these count as signs. As your signage maximum. Use them as you wish but this
is the maximum that you can use based on the size of the building. Just like we moderate
signage. But it seems to me that again, the intent in designing those buildings, to use that as
a signage attraction, that we should deal with that for what it is. And call it what it is.
Scott: Well I think what you're getting at is we talk about the intent statement is that a
business needs to identify their location and I think if the signage is used for that purpose, it
doesn't really matter if it says Joe's Bait Shop with blue lines around it. I mean if I were
faced with a situation with my business I'd say well, I think what I'm going to do is trade my
color banding for the name Joe's Bait Shop and make that as big as allowable by the
ordinance and I think maybe that's what we want to do. Is we want to encourage people to
focus on making it a real sign and then not try to get bonus attraction based upon colors. I
think that's, when I look at the intent statement of the ordinance, we want businesses to have
an equal playing field when it comes to identifying their location. But then I think we run
into the same situation, people who have more windows can get more window signage so I
think this will even out the playing field for those who don't use colors in their, the Super
America's, Holiday's, Block Busters, etc, etc. so I think I would agree with you in that we
need to apply the banding 100% against the sign area.
Farmakes: Well the other thing is that in reality, when you get the applicants to come in
together as a group. Say you get a grouping of fast food restaurants like you would say on
78th over there. You potentially could have one building here with green or bright green,
orange and red striping and the building across from it would be lime green and orange and a
purple striping. You get, there's no.
Harberts: Continuity.
Farmakes: There's no relief there. You're getting a bunch of buildings screaming, look at me
first and you're getting concentrations of them and it's certainly not an attractive, positive
issue for the city I don't think.
Harberts: But with something like that Jeff, are you saying that you'd rather see with a
situation like that where they're kind of uniformed, kind of consistent in building in their
signage. You know Eat at Joe's. Shop at.
Farmakes: I think we should allow the vendor the discretion of how they want to do it. I
think Wendy's did a good job on it. I think we say Taco Bell come in here and there was a
7
7�
11-1i
LJ
Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
' perception that they weren't going to have the bands on there. When it came before the
Council, they were going to have the bands on there. And then the response was made, well
all Taco Bells have the bands on there and that's not true. Several Taco Bells don't have the
' bands on there.
Scott: Yeah, Minnetonka.
Farmakes: And I think we keep on seeing this over and over again. Whether it's a tire center
or whether it's a gas station or whether it's, I think we should make an attempt to deal with
' that issue so we have an intent of what the final outcome's going to be once all the buildings
are up. And again I think the issue is not to exclude but to moderate.
1 Harberts: Well I would tend to agree.
Conrad: I don't agree at all so, I don't think that this is, we're not talking about signage. This
identification. There's no difference in a style of a building. That's identification. That's
why chains build the same style so it's identification. A stripe is the same thing. I don't
perceive this ordinance regulating design. This is a sign ordinance. It's words. The whole
' intent was to structure how many, what space you can put signs in period. It had nothing to
do with design of the side of the building. So it's, we'd have to start, if we're going to now
' start putting in design into the criteria, we'd better go back to zero and start again because
none of the rules apply.
' Farmakes: How we design say in the Holiday where you have plexiglass striping on the top
of the building constitutes a major part of the building. Do you feel that that's architecturally
relevant to the building or is that there for an attraction?
' Conrad: Is it architecturally relevant? It's their design. It's their style. It's not signage, in
my definition. It's not regulated by this ordinance:
Ledvina: It's not in the definition of sign does not identify architectural elements or colors or.
Farmakes: If a wall sign is attached to a building, the striping runs and connects to it, how is
that any different than typography that's in color and the red striping and the blue striping
running to it any different.
' Conrad: Well then you could take it further. Is brick, you know, does brick do something
for identification versus a striping? You know, I don't think anybody starting from day one
' when this was reviewed, really considered that type of architecture impacting the sign
ordinance. I really don't. I don't think we've really taken a look at that.
8
Planning Commission Meeting • November l6, 1994
Farmakes: But I think it is evident that developers and business, particularly chain
businesses, are addressing the issue of maximizing presence by dealing with that through
architectural add on's.
Conrad: I'm not debating that.
Farmakes: So I don't think we're addressing that in our architectural issues because we did
make the assumption that we were going to deal with that in signage, or define that. And
define it in such a way that it could be moderated.
Conrad: Boy I'd be real, here we are again trying to get this through after months and this is
the first I've heard of it Jeff. I've gone all those extra sessions and I just haven't paid
attention to that. I would have considered all the ratios, all the square footages entirely
differently. I would have found it terribly complex. I addressed all these in terms of what
does it take to get a word message out on a building basically or for it to advertise a service
or a product or whatever. I never considered it in terms of how the side of the building
overall should look and whether the impact had a bearing on the size of the sign, or the
materials of the sign. But if we were doing that, we should Have, geez we should have
looked at it a long time ago. I'm real uncomfortable with bottling it in. I really am. I think
it makes it terribly difficult to understand.
Scott: Is that something that should be regulated?
Conrad: You know the whole issue goes back to design. Do we want stripes on buildings?
You know, that's really the issue. If people put designs there because they're doing exactly
what Jeff is saying. They want identification. I don't care if it's stripes or if it's brick or if
it's an arch for, you know if it's an arch on the top of your deal or a giant football, like those
restaurants to have. I think design criteria regulate that. I don't know. And they're not bad
issues to deal with. It's good to make the city. determine if it wants to get involved in the
architecture game and simplicity might, there may be some simple things that we could agree
on but I know it's a complex issue and I don't know if we could really, I don't know if we
could come to some kind of consensus. It's terribly confusing to me.
Ledvina: I think the definition of sign as a whole meaning and it becomes a very fuzzy
thing. What if my colors happen to be like a tan and a nice forest green and I want to put
some colors on the building. -If I can't do that, even though it looks great because it's
considered a sign, I don't think that would be fair. I'm tracking with Ladd because I think
that bands on buildings are an architectural treatment. I don't see that specifically as a sign.
At least not the way we've defined it up until this point.
9
0
' Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
I Scott: Does it matter if they're lit or unlit? Like a back lit band versus tile.
' Ledvina: No, doesn't matter to me.
Scott: What do you think Diane?
' Harberts: I think it does. I think when it's lit...
' Conrad: That's an interesting.
Scott: I can see where Matt's coming from if it's architectural. I mean is it an attractant or
isn't it? Well it's more of an attractant when it's back lit and it's plastic and all this kind of
stuff but if it's something, I think there is a difference, at least in my mind, between an
architectural. When I think of an architectural detail, I think of something that is "built into
' the building" like whether it's the brick or whatever. Something that's then architecturally
versus something that's signage is something that after the building is built, it's stuck onto the
building.
Harberts: Well I think the colors are just as important, especially a franchise or chain type
store as the word, and even to some extent more the colors and the placement than the word
itself. I mean you know when you're driving and oh, remember you just look for the golden
arches. You know you don't look for McDonald's. You look for that identity piece. I
understand what Jeff is saying when you, in terms of what we're trying to achieve in
Chanhassen. Do we want to, in a sense control that so it's more of a moderate or blended
look versus a piece that stands out by itself? You know in some of the places that I have
visited, such as Martha's Vineyard, they have no identity in terms like a McDonald's or
whatever. It's certainly the Cape Cod look and a little sign out front and that's all you see is
one continuous type of architecture. You don't have the individualities in terms of the
franchise or whatever.
Scott: Is that, do you feel then that's a pretty equal playing field?
Harberts: Well I don't know about equal playing field. It certainly added characteristic to the
island. It was a little hard adjusting in terms of you just can't pick out the golden arches or
something. You have to kind of look for it. That was the only thing I was struggling with
but I kind of like the characteristic it brought.
Scott: I don't know, there's a development that you can see from, I think it's on Weaver Lake
Road and 494, Maple Grove I think is where it is and what they've done is there's no banding
on any of these buildings. They're all brick and everybody gets their so many square feet.
10
Planning Commission Meeting • November 16, 1994
So whether it's McDonald's or Poppin Fresh or a Burger King, and they have them on very
short pylon signs. So I think if you're looking from a consumer standpoint, if the consumer is
being bombarded by all sorts of huge signage, trying to find a place can be difficult. But if
there's an equal playing field like what I've seen in parts of California and Maple Grove's a
good example, everybody knows that the logos are going to be about this far off the ground
and they're all going to be about this size. But there's an equal playing field and judging
from the parking lots of the place, I don't think any of the retailers are suffering. But they all
know what the rules are.
Harberts: But the burden then is on the businesses to somehow make themselves distinct
within those parameters because you don't get that immediate recognition. I mean when you
see that wave on a Coke can. The Coke words does not have to be there but you see that
wave and right away you think about Coke.
Scott: Well it all boils down to our definition of what's a sign and what isn't.
Harberts: Right, exactly.
Scott: And is that the thing that we need to recraft?
Harberts: Well I think it's the real, to me the question is, what are we trying to achieve and I
think that's again, it comes into the balance of being responsive to the business needs as well
as being responsive to the residents. You know I don't want to see a pink and green building
right next to each other because that's what their corporate colors or trademarks or whatever
but I certainly am sensitive to, I don't want to really place an undue burden on the business
climate because of things like that. I think there is a moderate or a compromising there. I
don't know what the answer is but.
Scott: Well that's what we need to do is to have an answer.
Farmakes: An example I think would be the Minnetonka Wendy's over there on TH 7 and
TH 101. They have a red, large red band going around that building, back lit where Wendy's
is on and the differences to the one they built here. I think this one's a much more attractive
building. It's a more moderate signage and I think there's just different outcome of what we
got there. Overall I think we're betting off having something like that, the perception of
higher class in this city than a piece of being a strip mall version over on TH 101.
Ledvina: There's a couple of dynamics that are working there though. That's an older
building. That's 6.7 years old and I think Wendy's is going more upscale with their clientele
and I think that's the reason why we see a better building.
11
J
�7
L
Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
Farmakes: But the point is, when that building came by, we worked on that building. There
were red bands on that building so my point is that if I'm given a design assignment and I'm
told to try and maximize the presence of that building and there is a cap on signage, I'm
going to find a way to get around that cap. And the first thing I would recommend was to
incorporate an attractant into the architecture. Into the feature and create the banding and if
you look 'at Block Buster Video, they have a large blue back lit awning and a large blue
stripe running around the building. The intent of that is to attract. It's nothing to do with
architecture. It's not there to make the building look better.
Ledvina: But it is part of the architecture.
' Farmakes: So is the wall sign. It's attached to the wall. If you're going to define the word
architecture, it's the overall presence of the building looking at it. I mean it's, to me the
intent of the brick is not to create an attractant. It's not to pull your eye. And if you're
' looking at the outcome of a building and it's purpose, there are buildings where the signage
and intent of the building sort of proceeds the architecture. And you'll see that in a lot of
commercial areas where what you're looking at is signage and you're not looking at buildings.
' Because we're building a downtown supposedly and not a strip mall, that's something we
should be concerned about.
n
Harberts: I think colors and design like that is a very important element of signage. It's not
just words. That's my feeling.
Scott: Well what about something like this. We're concerned about what's architecture and
what's signage. What about if we say if it's tenant specific? If the tenant of the building
changes, like if Block Buster Video in Eden Prairie decides that they want to move someplace
else and Edina Realty goes in, is the blue banding going to come down? Sure. Sure as heck
will be. Maybe if it's, because signage is tenant specific and architectural features are not.
Now I'm not stating that as a fact. I'm throwing that out. I mean is that kind of what we're
talking about here? If it's tenant specific, it's signage. If it's not, its an architectural feature
which means, I think we're talking from a leasehold agreement, it's a fixture or a lease hold
improvement versus the physical building.
Conrad: We're not going to solve this one tonight. The issue is, do you want to, it's
architecture. We're talking pure and simple architecture. It's definition. Some want to attach
it to a sign ordinance but we're talking architecture. Talking, does it fit? Are we mellowing
our architecture in so it's sort of the same in Chanhassen? That's sort of the direction that I'm
hearing. And stripes don't do that. I can't, you're not going to be able to give me something
to vote on that says, by a definition were going to solve this. If we bring architecture and
this into this ordinance, somebody else, not me is going to have to go through this. I can't
12
Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
vote positively on the ordinance tonight and there's been a terrible amount of work put in on
it. It's just different definitions which means all this stuff has to be relooked at. If we
change the definition to say that if it's tenant related or whatever, we still have to go back and
say okay, now what are we talking about? Does the same 80 square feet that we allowed for
signage, is that the right number now that its incorporating stripes? Or now that it's
incorporating neon. You know how about, we get into other cities where you have a lot of
lights. I like neon by the way. I think neon's a neat architectural element. I don't consider it
signage. I think it's architectural and I think it's generally pretty neat. But I think for
tonight's purposes, if we're uncomfortable that this ordinance is not incorporating enough, then
it should go back but I don't think we're going to come up with a resolution on it.
Farmakes: Is your point that you're making that the Highway 5 overlay architectural
standards should be changed or amended to address that issue versus...
Conrad: See what you're bringing up, you know what you're bringing up Jeff is, in my mind,
architectural standards and I don't know if there's a difference between Highway 5 or the
commercial or the CBD or Highway Business. I don't know the difference between
architectural standards in the different areas.
Farmakes: There isn't. I think that this area is intentionally brought together. The way that
you get around the limitation is to incorporate it into the architecture. That's the motivation
for doing it.
Scott: Ladd do you, do you believe that there need to be guidelines for the banding? Your
thought is that this is probably not the place for it.
Conrad: I think the sign ordinance should be looked at simply for signage and if we want an
architectural standards to apply, those standards can, somebody can develop that and the City
Council can review those standards as they apply to this.
Scott: What, from a Highway ,5 standpoint and I've kind of lost track where that is Kate.
Where is the, is there an ordinance?
Aanenson: Correct.
Scott: So basically we'd have to include the banding as an architectural piece.
Aanenson: Right.
Scott: That would have to be an amendment to that ordinance.
0
i J
13 1
J
n
F
Planning Commission Meeting • November 16, 1994
Aanenson: I think there's language in it that covers this issue. It's the City Attorney's
opinion too that really what we're doing, as Ladd indicated, we're pulling architectural issues
into the sign ordinance and we're really kind of getting into a gray area there.
Scott: But we do believe that there need to be some specific guidelines for it and as long as
there's a home for that, because I don't want to, I mean I've seen a number of instances were
we'll have an applicant come in and they'll say, I have several pieces of information between
this ordinance and that ordinance. Does that mean that I get two signs or you know, and if
the applicants can't figure out the ordinance, you know we just need to know where the
guidelines are so these people can come forward relatively quickly. Know what we're
expecting and deliver a product that we can approve. So I mean if there's a home for it in the
other ordinance, I think that will serve what you guys are doing. Or want to do is signage
here as defined as logos, service marks, sales marks, that kind of stuff. Banding and so forth
become.
Aanenson: I think this will be more clearly defined in the Highway 5 overlay. It's in there
but it's not to the extent. The way we had defined it here, we're trying to separate, as you
indicated, more tenant specific but what we found is company logos or associated with the
company... If someone was just to put a band on, or an architectural feature and it's not a
franchise or it's not associated, we look at that as an architectural feature. Then you have to
find out what are the company colors and it's .... and I think that's where you're coming from is
more specific to a certain type of business association. So it's our opinion that if you want
something like that, then it really belongs in the Highway 5 ... architecture for the Highway 5
overlay zone.
Ledvina: Well we're going to need it more beyond the Highway 5 zone. I mean we need it
through the entire city essentially.
Aanenson: City ordinance.
Conrad: I think that's a real good issue just to float up to the City Council. Seriously.
Architectural standards is just a real difficult thing for a city to get involved in. Especially a
city the size of Chanhassen. But if we believe in those things, I'd sure like to get some
feedback from the City Council so that staff, its not Highway 5. We're talking about you
know, you don't just have architectural standards for Highway 5 corridor. You have them for
the city. If you want them, you have them for the entire city. I'd like to see if the City
Council is interested in doing that, you know and then maybe something can be done. It's
still, it's still terribly difficult but.
14
Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
Farmakes: The Highway S task force had a subcommittee dealing with architectural standards
for a year. That's what we were discussing there in that ordinance. That was part of the
ordinance for the Highway S overlay district. And the standards covered the commercial area
of Highway S.
Conrad: But not downtown. Not our CBD.
Aanenson: Yes.
Farmakes: Well, not to the south.
Aanenson: Not to the south. They covered, there's two districts. One, the existing
downtown area and then the other district is from Powers going west. It does cover all the
downtown. There are places in the industrial park...
Farmakes: The intent when we worked on it was that it be a blueprint to establish—but that
was the point where we had a consultant brought in and discussing issues of how it was
handled in other cities. What recommendations they put together from, I forget the
consultant's name but we did deal with it for a year.
Aanenson: Are you talking about Camiros?
Farmakes: Yeah.
Conrad: Do we allow lights shining on our buildings? Spot lights to illuminate our
buildings at night? There's so many things, that could be considered, well that's a real
confusing but down south, that's a real popular thing to do. Real attractive. I doubt that we'd
allow it here.
Harberts: If you want to pay the electric bills.
Conrad: Well it's neat. It's neat. It comes up from the ground.
Ledvina: Are you saying we wouldn't allow it?
Conrad: I don't think we would.
Scott: Well getting back to the issue about what's signage and isn% does it make sense to
direct staff to beef up the section in the Highway S architectural?
15
Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
' Farmakes: I would recommend that. When we dealt with that as a subcommittee, we dealt
with that ambiguously. The reason being is ... when we dealt with the sign ordinance, that
we'd tighten that up. It seems to me that it would make sense to deal with it as an
architectural standards because that's truly what it is. It is a gray area because of-it's a
design attempt to get around the maximum requirements. ?hat's what it is. And if you,
' there's no aesthetic reason to back light an awning. You do it because you want to be seen
from the highway and there's nothing wrong with that but the question is, how much of it do
you have. Do you have an entire town of back lit awnings. It's jsut a question of what you
want to wind up with.
Scott: What would be your direction to staff with regards to that. The architectural standards
' ...in dealing with banding and that sort of stuff.
Farmakes: When we're dealing with it as a sign ordinance, if you have a maximum amount
of it like you do in a sign, it seems like a logical way to treat that. Because that would give
the vendor the option of what they wanted to do. If you deal with it as an architectural
standard, it becomes far more difficult because you're dealing with square footages. You're
' dealing with the size of the building. You're dealing with, it's an accent mark that they don't
define that by square. So if you're looking at that for either eliminating it or having it, I'm
' not quite sure how you would approach that other than to define it by how you would like to
moderate it. A percent or eliminate it altogether.
' Scott: But the home for that regulation is, you're thinking the Highway S architectural
standards.
Farmakes: We used the terms I think, and help me out here. I think it was bright colors is
what they recommended. Unnatural bright colors. Dayglo orange or green or things of that
nature. We may be able to address it as defining it as the subject matter, the gray area where
' it becomes, where the architectural feature becomes a gray area or it connects with the sign or
is a part of the continuation of the corporate colors.
I Scott: I think we all agree it needs to be, there need to be guidelines.
Conrad: But it keeps coming up so I think.
Ledvina: Right. We should be reviewing it in terms of the direction that this thing should
go.
Conrad: Somebody should review the subject.
16
Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
Scott: And the home for the guideline should be in the Highway S document.
Conrad: Absolutely. Well no, it should be someplace else.
Scott: Yeah, other than this.
Farmakes: Currently the Highway S I think is the only, the two districts are the only ones
that are covered by that.
Scott: So the consensus here is that we need to give direction to the staff to apply perhaps
the thought process that we used for signage, i.e. print logos. Use some sort, that similar
methodology to the banding piece to somehow quantify it and express what you would like to
see as a percentage or whatever. But use the methodology that we use to regulate signage in
the sign ordinance with regards to size versus the building. And use that same sort of
methodology in the architectural standard section of Highway S to deal with banding. And
then I'm sure it comes with a definition of what banding is. We have a definition of what
signage is here.
Conrad: Well I'd like to see Jeff go to City Council. You know more than, you know what
you're talking about. I guess I'd like you to go there and just address.
Farmakes: That'd be fine. I'd be happy to do that. I'd like to see the staff take some
photographs of some of the examples of what we're talking about to use as visual aids in
defining it. I think that again the intent, whether you're a business person or whether you're
just a citizen in the city, the intent is to have a nice looking city. And I think again, the by
word is moderation and not illumination but to moderate the amount of this. Well have a
better looking place and to use an example of the Wendy's to Abra or the Goodyear. If you
compare those to the same businesses elsewhere in surrounding communities here, we have
nicer looking buildings here. And they're still seen from the highway. They're seen from the
road but they're not going to make a, cause ac-*r crash or something because they're blinding.
Scott: Well the noise level. The visual noise level is lower because we've established a
lower threshhold. That's why the buildings look better.
Farmakes: And as you group more and more buildings together, that becomes a factor in
defining the character of the city. And that's my point.
Scott: Okay. So we know where we're, is everybody clear on where were going with this
and staff? Okay. Any other discussion?
17
0
I
0
Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
I Harberts: Here.
' Scott: Yes ma'am.
Harberts: I would really recommend that on page 5, number (d), that bus benches, that (d) be
' changed to bench signs are prohibited except at designated transit stops as defined by the
Southwest Metro Transit Commission, or take it out entirely and have a different ordinance. I
think staff should put outlined and emphasize that cities have not had problems with it and it
' is considered a benefit to the community. That's all I'll say.
Ledvina: Just a question Diane on that. Now that would relate specifically to ... benches
' right?
Harberts: At transit stops.
Aanenson: So they can't just be anywhere. It has to be a designated stop.
' Harberts: And it would be as designated by the Transit Authority which would include then,
we would let the city know what we're doing because we have, we get approval from the city
when we do that.
Farmakes: I have a question on the, are we done with that?
Harberts: I think so.
Ledvina: Well how do you reconcile the City Attorney's opinion then? That this is
exclusionary.
Conrad: She included anybody.
Aanenson: She included anybody so, if somebody wanted to get a permit and you came to
the city to have a bus stop here, at a Southwest Metro bus stop...
Ledvina: Oh, I see.
Scott: Because I know one of the things that Diane is talking about is the public/private. I
mean if the taxpayers don't have to pay to put it up but because these are, I mean they're a
public benefit but they are predominantly beneficial when they are, in my opinion, they are
only, or they're predominantly beneficial when they're associated with a transit stop. That
allows you to take advantage of that.
is
Planning Commission Meeting • November 16, 1994
Harberts: Right. And again, I would say that except at designated transit stops that are
designated by the Southwest Metro Transit Commission. And I want to assure that that
interpretation includes that Southwest Metro Transit Commission is responsible for working
with the city and with any particular locations. There may be some transit stops where we
don't feel we want to see a bus bench there. But for instance at the park and ride lot, I think
it'd be fine.
Conrad: Diane should there be, I guess the issue is, either to take it out of this ordinance or
separate ordinance or keep it as simple as what you moved. Do we need more definition than
that? Is it so loose right now because it's only 10 words, do we need better definitions to
make it a separate ordinance or is it, are we comfortable enough as.
Harberts: Well the intent of my statement is that it allows for advertising at benches that are
located only at transit stops and I don't want to use the word regulated but I don't know of
any other word at this point.
Scott. As designated by the transit authority, whoever that may be.
Harberts: Right, right. Because on practices that we chat with the city about that because
there are liability issues with regard to sight lines. Do you even want to have a bus bench
there and things like that. So that's why I wanted to make sure that whatever wording, it
makes those, reaches those intents.
Conrad: The other thing though is don't we want to have permission from the land owner?
Harberts: Oh definitely.
Conrad: Now is that.
Harberts: That's why as designated by Southwest Metro. We would take on all of that
responsibility to make sure that those agreements are in place because I mean there's liability
issues here so that's why, by designated by Southwest Metro Transit Commission, they take
on the responsibility to make sure all those ducks are in a row. And again, with something
like that, it goes with city approval and consent or something. That's how we work. That's
the relationship.
Scott: Any other discussion before we open the public hearing?
Farmakes: I do have one definition Td like clarified. On window signage, when we use 50 %,
do we define that as temporary signage? That's something that the ordinance does but is that
119 1
Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
what we're expecting when we're expecting 50% of the window space is covered by signage
on a building?
Rask: The way I understand it, it would be, it could be temporary or permanent. You just
can't cover more than 50 %.
Farmakes: So we potentially could be adding several hundred square feet in a large building
of signage from the projected out from the building, correct?
Rask: Correct. The way it is currently written, yes.
Farmakes: Is that the intent of what we want to achieve? It's my understanding when we're
dealing with window signage, that we're dealing with temporary signage. Sale specials
...displays, that sort of thing. We weren't dealing with permanent signage and I'm seeing
more and more of the back lit and the neon supplied by some of the franchisees where they're
mounted into the window as permanent signage. I'm wondering, what's the difference of
putting a moderation on signage, on the wall sign up above or on the pylon and then you're
adding several hundred feel in the window space of permanent signs. Should there be a
definition there between temporary and permanent?
Rask: I think one of the reasons it wasn't addressed more is the difficulty of enforcing a
condition like that. We'd have to control and see how long...limit temporary signage say to
one month time, we'd have—it'd be difficult to enforce. ...put that in there, limit the length of
a ... window sign. I think that was the original concern brought up. We're trying to keep this
' ordinance simple.
Ledvina: What would you suggest Jeff?
Farmakes: I don't know. It's my understanding from talking to some retail that's in town,
they're concerned about temporary signage. MGM for instance.
Scott: That's 100% now.
Farmakes: Well they're 100 %. There isn't that much permanent signage in the windows.
There are a few companies that don't have much window space like Chan Lawn & Sports that
do have the opportunity to put up a lot of back lit supplied franchise type signage that's
provided to them but they don't happen to have much window space. Festival puts up a fair
amount of specials in the window. I don't think they have any permanent signage ... in their
windows. Byerly's I'm assuming will have none by the looks of things.. Target also none. I
guess if there are no more large scaled buildings with a lot of signage in windows to put up,
20
Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
the commercial buildings in Chanhassen I guess really isn't a major issue from what I can see
but there's a potential there if you had a building that had several hundred square feet of
window space. Half of that could be a permanent sign projected out to the street.
Ledvina: Are you saying all of a sudden they're going to look at this and say whoa, and put
up all kinds of signs?
Farmakes: Well no. That ordinance allows you to put up half of the square footage of the
window space. If I was at the Riveria, we'd have a lot less signage available to us because
the structure of our building does not have much windows. Another structure that has a lot of
window space like Subway. I'm not sure what the covenants within their lease are restricting
them to but they have I think 3/4 of their wall space is glass. Fully able to project to the
Gstreet there. I'm not sure how many hundreds of square feet it is but the ordinance allows
them to have it.
Scott: I know from a, is it to make a definition between temporary and permanent with
regard to window signage, you're right. I mean the sign police would be a full time job. And
I think it's really kind of, from an enforcement standpoint, you say SO%. It doesn't matter if
it's permanent or temporary. I think if someone is going to use window signage effectively,
the purpose of window signage, at least in my view, is it's a rotating product oriented
temporary usage. At least that's what I think it is and it's a question of how heavy does the
regulation want to get. I think 50% is, and don't make a definition in between whether it's
permanent or whether it's temporary. I think the Best of what we want to do, we want to
moderate the amount of window signage. 50 %'s pretty easy to eye ball and whether it's
temporary or permanent, it really doesn't matter. So what? Any other discussion? Okay, can
I have a motion to open the public hearing please.
Conrad moved, Ledvina seconded to open the public hearing. All voted in favor and the
motion carried. The public bearing was opened,.
Scott: Anybody who would like to address the Planning Commission, please step forward.
Introduce yourself. Yes sir. Introduce yourself. Give us your address and let us know what's
on your mind.
Leonard Thiel: Chair, members of the commission. My name is Leonard Thiel. I'm at 5643
Green Circle Drive in Minnetonka, Minnesota. As I've stated to you the last time I had a
chance to visit with you a couple three weeks ago, I told you that the principle, Mr.
Danielson, President of the company was out of town because we had changed, you had
changed the date of the public hearing and so he had made other arrangements and couldn't
be here. He wanted to be here so he'd like to address you tonight just for a couple seconds to
21
n
Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
cover our viewpoints. Roland Danielson is the President of U.S. Bench and he'd like to
speak.
Roland Danielson: Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission. Roland Danielson
...mentioned and my brother and I own U.S. Bench Corporation and we've been in business
for 48 years. And I just wanted to support the motion that was made by Commissioner
Harberts relative to benches at bus stops. ...that's the essence of our business, and we have
been...serving the mass transit rider all through these years and we feel very, very strongly
about it being at a transit stop and no other place. And the whole idea and the whole premise
...local firms and local companies to help support the potential service ... As a matter of fact I
got a couple of letters today from...so that's kind of the premise in which we work and we
have been doing that... I also wanted to mention that we insure all the benches for $3
million... They are covered. That includes the transit company. It includes the city of
Chanhassen and it includes ourselves and it includes the sponsor so we're very conscientious
about that ... so we feel that the bench system, that really works well can be enhanced by a
bench ordinance. We've had a number of ordinances and we..submit some and that just spells
our pretty carefully, very carefully, very rigidly how ... good bench system would work... I just
wanted to touch on a few things there and show our support ... Thank you very much.
Scott: Good, thank you very much.
Leonard Thiel: To reiterate... it's not a sign company. It's rather a convenience for bus riders
and an economical way for a small business in your community to advertise in an unobtrusive
way.
Scott: Thank you. Anyone else?
Randy Herman: Randy Herman, 2792 Piper Ridge Lane. I didn't intend to do this tonight
but I'd like to speak kind of as three people. I'm a resident, I'm a business owner. I'm also a
member of the Chamber that worked with you .guys on the sign ordinance. As a resident,
when I sit and listen to these kinds of discussions, I'm bothered by what I see as an ever
increasing role of the city to kind of mandate everything bland. I get the impression that if it
was totally left up to certain people, we'd have nothing but beige and brown and tan. And I'd
like to speak for myself and I think a number of other people, I like a little color. I think
back lit awnings, with or without advertising are nice looking. I think they dress up a
building. I like to drive through the city and I like to see well lit, nicely done buildings that
might be green. That might be pink. There was mention of Highway 101 and Highway 7.
There also now is on that corner a couple of restaurants and a bank that use noon as a
highlight. They are great looking. They look neat. You drive down the highway, they stand
out and son of a gun, you actually know who's there and what business it is. At the same
22
Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
time, I think they add flavor to that comer. I don't think everything needs to be bland. I
don't think it does anybody any good. As a business owner, it's a control issue again. I think
if you want to limit the amount of signage, I think we've tried to do that. We've set criteria
about maximum allowables. I don't think it should be the business of the city to mandate the
color, the form, the graphics. What is good advertising taste. What is poor advertising taste.
Let the businesses do that. There seems to be an assumption that businesses will always do
the worst thing and I think if that was true, every building in the city that had a business in it
would be dayglo orange or dayglo pink but that's not true. Businesses try to present
themselves in a certain manner to attract a clientele that they perceive as their clientele. If
you think they're doing business in an upscale community, you'll probably try to present your
building and your business and your signage in an upscale way. And I think that what the
city needs to do is set solid criteria. Maximum allowables. Square footage, whatever, and
then get the hell out of the way. I mean leave it up to the businesses to decide what they
want to do from there. And again, as a resident, it doesn't bother me that Fina or Super
America wants to put a band around their gas tanks or above them on the awning. I think it
looks well lit. It identifies where they are. It identifies what they do. There's way too much
personal opinion that can get entered into this idea of what's tasteful and what isn't and we've
got to leave it alone. It's up to the businesses. If somebody wants to paint their building an
ugly color, it's likely that they'll attract less clientele. It will balance itself out. As a
Chamber member and someone who was at the meetings and worked on this, I'm floored. I
mean when I saw some of the things that got entered into here, I just kind of wondered what
were we negotiating. What were we working on that whole time? Again, if we're going to
talk about architectural treatments, and maybe that's a moot point at this point, but to me it
opens up the whole thing. I mean we didn't talk about maximum square footages based on
that there might be a restriction on the amount of graphic banding or color a building could
use or whatever. We talked about it based on signage. And maybe it's a moot point, I don't
know. But it got thrown in there theoretically because that was brought up last time but that
was not the intent I understood last time when we met here as far as what staff was going to
work on. The very first thing that hit me on .the very first page under purpose, is we changed
the language which allows, permits businesses a'reasonable and equitable opportunity to
advertise period. To advertise the location of a business. I mean what the heck. Signs are to
advertise what you do. I don't want to just put Moore on the front of my business. I want to
put Moore Signs. Merit would like to put Merit Heating. I mean if we want to do that, why
don't we just put big numbers up and well have a key and you look for number 2000 is
Byerly's. I mean signs are to advertise. It's a basic premise of the sign. 1 don't understand.
Why would you want to restrict that? And I don't understand where that came from. I mean
it's just foreign to me that it got thrown in there. Ah, there's a lot of them. On temporary
signage, page 6, number 9. This wasn't an addition but it got talked about last time. Nothing
was done with it. We talked about it and came up with a possible solution. This section
allows a 64 square foot sign under certain circumstances. A temporary sign. There was
23
r
7
I
Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
concern that if that sign was allowed to be 10 feet from the property line, which is the
standard throughout the ordinance, that a 64 square foot sign could fall over and be over the
property line. I think that's a legitimate concern. Our suggestion here would be, and this
section only allows a maximum of 64 square feet. It doesn't mean every sign will be 64
square feet. Our suggestion would be, set a minimum setback here of 10 feet and add one
foot of setback for every foot that that sign exceeds 10 feet in height. That's a simple
formula that will just say if it's 15 feet tall, it's got to be 15 feet back. Everywhere else pretty
much in the ordinance where we've got a temporary sign and we've set it's a maximum 10
foot tall sign, we've said it's got to be a minimum of 10 feet back from the property line.
Page 8, (c)(2). There's a restriction that allows only 4 signs per intersection. This is an off
site directional sign. I'm curious what we're going to do about the fifth developer that comes
in on that corner. Is it first come, first serve? Or what? I mean I'd hate to be that fifth or
sixth guy if I can't have an off site directional signage and the 4 guys before me could.
(c)(7), such sign shall be removed 12 months after the sign has been erected. It seems to me
it should be period there. And the developer may not apply for a second off premise
directional sign permit, there's no permit necessary over this section. Banners at 100 feet.
I'm sure there's a lot of people that think Byerly's banner currently is too big. I don't. I don't
think it's too big for the building. I don't think it's too big for the purpose. I don't even think
it's ugly at the size it is, and it's huge. It's probably 300 feet. ,It might be 4. We've allowed
a maximum of 100 square feet. That's a 4 foot x 25 foot banner which can't be read very far.
I think that ought to be increased and that was something we had talked about in the initial
discussions.
Ledvina: I'm sorry Randy, the size of banners ?. Is this page 9?
Randy Herman: Yeah that was, yes. Page 9. Page 12 (a). The second sentence is no sign
shall be placed within any drainage utility easement or utility easement. In (c) there's been a
collection made to say, it can be placed in a utility easement, if approved by the city. I think
that was the intent in (a) also. Because I think we've all determined that signs need to be in
utility easements. I mean that's where the majority of our permanent signs on main street are
and where most of the temporary signs go. I.'Nnk it's very unusual that a city would ask for
permission to put a temporary sign in a utility easement but I guess that may be the way it's
going to be. I'm not sure what the concerns are. A temporary sign means temporary. If
there needs to be utility work, it's easily removed. Maybe instead of having to have
everybody come in and ask for permission, maybe we could just say the same thing that we
did with political signs for some of the other directional signs. Put a name and phone number
on it. Who's responsible for it. If it needs to be pulled, call. Have it pulled. The last
session we talked about window signage. One of the concerns I hear Jeff bring up was what
about somebody like the Riveria. The Riveria, they don't have any windows. That's unfair to
them. How about a minimum allowable? How about if we say you can have 32 square feet
24
Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
of window signs regardless. And if you've only got 10 feet of windows, well you can at least
have, you can use them to their fullest use. When you get over a certain point, you've got a
lot of windows, then the 50% maximum applies. The whole architectural sign feature, I
thought that was all very vague and again it just kind of places the city in the control of
colors and everything else. I don't agree with it. Maintenance and repair. To me this is
almost the heart of this whole ordinance. We don't have a lot of bad signage in Chanhassen.
Most of what's bad is bad because it's deteriorated. It's falling over. It's falling apart. Some
of the worst signage that exists in the city is on property controlled by the city. Hanus' sign.
Isn't that property controlled by the HRA? That's the Hanus building sign with Toll Welding
on it. It's the entrance to the city. It's the ugliest sign in this town. I mean that sign should
go. But it shouldn't necessarily go because of it's.
Aanenson: It's going.
Randy Herman: Well I mean that to me it's right here. Take care of what's falling apart.
Make people maintain the signs. But don't put undue restrictions on them. It's been added
that 10 days after you get a notice to make a change, remove or alter, you've got to have it
done or you start getting fined. You start getting a violation. I'm here to tell you that 10
days is not going to be enough. 10 days to get a sign company out for a major sign repair, it
won't happen. It's got to be longer than that and 10 days is, I mean 30 days in the life of all
of us is plenty of time. I guess that's it. Again I feel like a whole lot of issues just got
opened right back up again after I thought we had pretty well resolved everything that was in
need of resolving. And I mean if all this stuff is back in and here to stay, two things. One, I
can tell you for sure this isn't going forward with any kind of Chamber support, and that may
not make a difference one way or the other to you. The other is that I feel like if we're going
to start adding things at this point in the game, let's go back and start talking about them
again. Let's open up the discussion about what makes sense. Let's get some counter points
in. I stood here last time kind of saying I thought we had come a long way. I take it back
this time. I think we've gone backwards and i.guess I really don't understand why or where it
came from. Those are my comments. .:.
Vernelle Clayton: I'm Vernelle Clayton. I live in Chanhassen at 422 Santa Fe Circle and I
have been involved in the, I'm sure as everybody else here ... been involved with the Chamber
group too and I guess I have to echo a little bit of what Randy said, although I was not able
to make the last meeting so he's had a little more involvement than I have. But we felt very
good and we told all the people that we represented, including in my case in addition to
participating as a Chamber member, I was... representing Market Square in my participation.
One of the things I tried to do was keep it as orderly as we could and as efficient as we could
when we had our 3 work sessions and more than that work sessions on the part of the
chamber. And who you represented, and the folks that we would represent ... so we didn't have
n
25 1
Planning Commission Meeting • November 16, 1994
' a room full of people every time. We thought we'd have it orderly and I think that you said
that you appreciated that and we just feel a little bit ... I feel a little bit like we wish that these
things had been available to us in those round table discussions so that we didn't have to
' stand here and make objections. I will try not to discuss the same things that Randy did but I
wanted to.-just a couple. I do agree with him that the message these days that America is
giving everyone is let's let government leave us alone. I think it came through loud and clear
' on Tuesday not too long ago and I think that's what Randy's saying here and that's what the
business people have said to us. I think the location of a business here, it's presense here
tonight in this draft, I would like to think stems from perhaps whoever put it in or whoever
decided to put it in or the group that did may be a little too close to the issue. I think saying
that means something to you, or to whomever put it there and I kind of picture what they're
thinking but I think to the new person or the business person picking up this document, it's
' going to look crazy. Because they're not just advertising their location of their business if
you take this literally. As Randy said, they're advertising their business. I think this is not
something that caused us a problem in the past. I think that ... will do what we're talking.
' Signs are an advertisement and it's really ... So that would be my thoughts there. I had a
couple other specific things. One is, I think this could have just been an oversight or again
an interpretation of a word or two ... appears in two places. At the bottom of page 6, item (g).
' And it appears again at the top of page 7. The work is completed... when we're saying a
project is completed, we're... That means different things in different situations. Often to the
contractor, the builder whoever's doing it ... and I think what we talked about in our session
' and I think ... I guess Randy mentioned the issue that ... on page 8, item 7 where we take a
portion out that relates to the fact ... I guess I would like to suggest that we do treat this
' situation the same as we treated the former situation on the top of page 7 where it gives front
and back sides some latitude and... have been suggesting to everyone that if we're going to
use a banner for a short period of time to make an impact, then let's let the people make an
' impact. Let's regulate this in a time period. 100 foot banner does not make an impact. It's
just, it's more, it just creates in my mind more clutter than a big oversized banner that you
know is only therefor a little while. A smaller banner looks like it's kind of a piece of paper
' on a big building... Now I don't think Byerly's banner looks all that bad and it's enormous. It
would never fly under this ordinance.
' Ledvina: Excuse me Vernelle, which section are you speaking to right now?
Vernelle Clayton: ...I should have stopped. It's on page 9, number... Again, the Chamber's
' position was that, the underlying position I think for the Chamber was let's have an open
mind in this special promotion kinds of things. This is what creates the fun, creates
excitement... commercial area. I have a sticky little point here on item 4—but I think that my
' ear perk up every time I get to the point where it says that the city should do something, or
remove it upon complaint. Because we kind of respond to a lot of things that are going on in
26
Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
the city right now that are responsive in nature. We say okay, you can do it unless somebody
'
complains. And as soon as somebody complains ... if it was a good idea It's a pretty negative
kind of way of doing things and also I happen to know from the work that I do with a lot of
the folks at Market Square, that—love to complain. ...from adjacent residential areas. If there
,
are complains from people from residential areas. If I put up a.on some vacant lot that
was—put up a large flag, I sure don't want to have to take it down because somebody that
parked in the parking lot on a Tuesday afternoon when it happened to be blowing at SO
'
mph—and so that's a lot of words about a very little point but I'd like ... don% have any other
specific things to say here. Maybe I have one more. I passed by end ... discuss the part about
architectural features... Architectural features is not defined. There was a lot of discussion
'
tonight that meant bands and anybody walking into this room not knowing-..felt about sign
bands would not know from having read the rest of this that they were related to bands. 10
or 15 years ago there was...I think it's the type of use that we typically are using to think now
,
when we're dealing with it. As you recall Midwest Federal a few years ago had round
buildings. In that case ... that would have been 100 The last thing, also I think if we had
this in place, Wendy's would not look like it does today. They were asking for very little
bright red. We could have said... Under the current ordinance., we were able to get those units
burgundy. So I'm not sure, I think they're right... I've been involved in writing several sign
plans for various developments. Three of them in town—in each case we used individual
,
letters. Back lit letters or... There are three buildings or shopping centers that probably have
up to 35, the possibility of 35 different signs. Different tenants that have the right... individual
letters or logos in their signs. So I guess I would question if this were to pass the way it is,
,
what happens if the—leaves and a new one wants to put a sign up that's like the other people
had ... some logos there. More of course I think the ordinance should say logos. If we have...
or other little things that various people use, the little ice cream thing that ... using for the i, if
'
they have those, then I think we want them back lit. I don't think we want them off to the
side, possibly not lit. I think we want them all to be consistent. I'd like to have you look at
that because I think when I look at these signs, if we put it the way those sigh plans are
'
written...
Ledvina: Where would that be addressed?
'
Vernelle Clayton: I have now wandered all the way over to page 14. ,
Ledvina: Did you have a specific suggestion for that?
Vernelle Clayton: Yes. Individual dimensional letters and/or logos. ,
Randy Herman: What about the industrial type buildings? The industrial building like the '
one I'm in. There's no need to have illuminated letters.
27 1
I Planning ommission Meeting • November 16 1994
g g
0
J
Vernelle Clayton: Well I think this says back lit letters. That's the proposal. It's been my
understanding that we're proposing all back lit letters all over town? ... okay, so individual
dimensional letters and/or logos. I just think it has to be in the sign—could be back lit.
Thanks.
Scott: Yeah, thank you. Anyone else? Can I have a motion to close the public hearing
please?
Conrad moved, Harberts seconded to close the public hearing. All voted in favor and the
motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
Scott: Comments. Jeff.
Farmakes: I'll just be brief here. We've talked about this now for ... 2 years. I'll start out just
with the premise of a couple of issues. One is, I certainly think that the city is acting as it
should in regards to this issue. I don't think it's over stepping it's bounds. Certainly
Chanhassen's been a planned community for a number of decades and signage as an issue of
planned communities is a given. It's not an imposition on personal rights or individual rights.
It deals with the issue that the common good proceeds individual rights and certain issues of
planned communities. It's been to court and the issue at court has been established. What
we're looking at here I believe is the same premise that an independent developer uses when
they have a criteria covenant within that lease for that business that they have to cover
signage, as Vemelle just mentioned. She's been involved with three of them. It does a
number of things. It protects the investment of the developer. It protects the other lease
holders from abuse by another leasee. I don't think that the city's any different except instead
of one development we're dealing with many and I think the intent is still the same. To
protect the community's investment and we have an obligation to do that. I think we'd be
walking away from that if we treated that as saying, well you go ahead and do it and let us
know when you're done. We're certainly taking this opportunity here for this commission to
have that input. We've been working with it, city staff and numerous consultants here for a
number of months and I also believe that, what have we got here. Five out of a rather
complicated ordinance. Actually if this was representative of the amount of work that we've
done, it'd probably be 100 pages long. I think that its been good that we've been with the
Chamber and that we've smoked out some of these things. Some of the nuts and bolts
applications. I think that there were some compromises made in the issues that were sent.
Starting out with the issue at the top of the list. The issue of the philosphical intent. The
issue to identify a location versus just the word advertisement. I'll take the benefit for that, as
requesting that in the last meeting and I think the reason being is that it certainly wouldn't
preclude if there was a sign saying Merit, to saying Merit Heating. That doesn't preclude
that. The issue of the intent would be what is the intent of the sign. If in the city regulating
28
Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
29 1
t
it are they trying to keep a business from identifying it's name or its location. I think that
came up with American Family Insurance. They wanted to put the logo and they wanted to
'
put the word Insurance on there. All of that would seem to me as part of identifying a
location of a business. However, if you get in and look at Byerly's and you look at Byerly's,
Fine Food, Open 24 Hours, Wine and Spirits, you get into another can of fish. If you look at
'
Holiday, you start talking about Cold Beer and Cold Cuts and the issue again is whether you
have an equitable opportunity to explain all their services and all their goods. When you
come back and say, well I can put signs all over the building saying that you know like a
'
special on beer and you can't regulate that. You can't tell me I can't put that up in the
window if I need to. I think again going back to the issue of what is it that the sign does. I
'
think that it identifies in a community a location of a business and that is the intent of
signage. The intent of advertising is to advertise goods and services and that is a sub -issue in
here within temporary signs and other forms of discussions for bus back advertising and
'
things of that nature, which defines it differently. For instance Merit Heating might say, list a
number of units that they sell or something of that nature. The unnecessary duplication of
signage in this ordinance, I'm still not sure whether or not we've covered that. I'm not sure
'
even if we had a statement on that, that would allow the city to deny a signage based on a
duplication for a sight line. I use an example of the Byerly's up here next door. That's a
duplication of signage, even though there's two different frontages. To me it's duplication of
'
the same sight line and it's unnecessary. But I'm not exactly sure how we could word that
into the ordinance. I have no problem with the issue of the banner. i think that perhaps the
banner issue is probably a well made point. We may be able to deal with that as to say three
'
different sized buildings or however we deal with the pylon issue constitutes different sized
signs for different square foot buildings. Obviously Byerly's used as an example is a 60,000
square foot building. There aren't a lot of those in Chanhassen. Perhaps we could come up
'
with something relevant there. I think the minimum probably on the signage is a good idea
to establish or look at that at least in dealing with the issue of fairness. For some buildings
that even have little window space. The pylon sign issue that we haven't addressed. I'm not
'
sure how to work that in but I think one of the big mistakes that the City Council, in their
wisdom have made was making an exception 'ft the rule again with Byerly's to putting a
pylon sign on 78th or an intent of the pylon sign. I think that the purpose again was over
'
kill. It's not necessary. You can certainly see it from the sight line and speed of 78th in the
distance. Again, you're hit with 3 Byerly signs from the same sight line. Do we need that? I
think that Target followed a good example. You have a large building. That sign is readily
'
seen from several hundred feet away. You know where to turn in. It serves it's purpose and
I think again as an example, we drive through the city with this moderation and the height of
monumentature, we can see, actually see the buildings instead of all the buildings being
'
covered up by pylon plastic. And again, it helps enhance the issue of a city. Small town
without the numerous. expanse of cars and covered with plastic. Anyway, I would like to see
that if there is a way, and I don't know how, if we could put that forth to the Council. I'd
,
29 1
Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
like to see that maintained. I think that's a good idea that perhaps almost by I think
circumstance that started off of the SA over on TH 41 and TH 7 where they lowered the
monumenture down. That really cleans up the look and puts it out towards the building
rather than being blown away by a big cover up in front. And again though I support the
pylons on TH 5 simply because it serves that purpose. That's a much faster highway. Much
farther sight lines and so on. It's a different sign assignment and again, it's not that I'm
against signage on 78th or Great Plains or any of the internal drives, but I think it serves a
purpose. I mean you literally drive right by the sign and it doesn't need to be 20 feet tall.
Other than that I think the majorityof this ordinance is good. That's not to say that
everybody's going to agree on everything. I do have one final comment on an issue of, I've
designed actually put together bus benches and bus backs and internal boards on MTC and I'll
tell you, I never knew that I was doing a public service. I was doing it for the money and the
businesses that I was doing it for were doing it for the money. It's a business. It perhaps this
is so much a public service we can donate all the income from it to public charities here.
Harberts: It's called transit charity.
Farmakes: Right, transit charity. I do support staff on this issue. I think the way to treat
this, rather than be industry specific, is to treat it, either you have it or you don't and I see
this as outdoor advertising is what it is. And I think the less of it the better. In this case, if
there was a way to legally do it where it was fair, because of it's limitation to bus backs, I
don't know if, or bus benches, I don't know if legally there's a way to do that. I would
support the staffs recommendation of eliminating it. That's it.
Scott: Ladd.
Conrad: A couple quick points. Under the definition or the purpose, I'd sure like to change
and instead of saying the location of the business, I'd like to say the name and service. I
think that just makes, I think that's clean. I agree with some of the points made to date by, at
the public hearing. I think we need to, I do believe that bus benches, transit style type of
signage should happen but it should be controlled so I can't, so the staff report as it stands I
don't agree with but I think there's a way to solve that. On page 6, points (c) under 9. I
think the Chamber's talking about a setback of 10 feet with an escalating setback for height.
Does anybody have a, I'm not sure exactly what the formula there is. Kate, didn't we think
that 10 feet was acceptable?
Aanenson: With this item ... that's fine. ...10 feet and if it's higher than that, 1 foot for each
additional foot of the sign.
Conrad: Does that make sense?
30
Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
Aanenson: Yeah.
Randy Herman: It will be hard to have a 64 square foot sign that's only 10 feet tall.
Ledvina: But it can be 15 feet tall ... right.
Conrad: So Kate, what would you say in terms of a 10 foot setback and then 1 foot.
Aanenson: Plus I foot of setback for each additional foot on the pylon sign.
Conrad: Okay. There's some semantic issues that I think can be dealt with fairly easily. I
think page 8, point 7.
Aanenson: That's fine. Strike that...
Conrad: That makes sense? Page 9, I think the banner issue was sort of nobody knows what
the right footage is.
Aanenson: And that just came up from what we used...
Conrad: I would recommend, because temporary stuff is just that. It's temporary. It's going
to be down. It should have some kind of impact but when, I think it's not bad to have some,
a little bit of control there so I guess what I'd recommend is a 4 foot. I'm thinking real and
Randy works in the real world and maybe some of us don't always think about that but if you
had a 4 foot sign, height wise, I think that gives you some decent letters. And it works in
terms of probably dimensions of this fabric that he works with and if you went to 35 feet
long, that would create 140 foot, square feet and I think that's going to, it may not bundle in
the Byerly's deal. I don't know. I'm just kind of interested. So instead of 100 feet, that may
be not right. 3 x 33. That might not work but. I'm just throwing around the 4 x 35 and I bet
you we could play with numbers all night long. I'm probably going to make a motion and
I'm just throwing that out right now that 100 foot, the way I got to 140 feet was 4 foot by 35.
That's how I.
Ledvina: If you recall from our work sessions, I think we started at 60 feet. We went to 80
and then we went to 100 and that's how this has progressed. I'm not saying that 140 is bad
but we have.
Conrad: We have gone up.
31
0
Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
Ledvina: We have worked with this number but, and if there's a good rationale, a 4 x 35 foot
' sign as a temporary banner, I'm okay with that.
Conrad: Well let's just take visually. That's a 4 foot height right there, is my guess. Is it 3
' or 4?
Scott: Remember when we first started talking about banners we said well let's think about
' examples. We talked about St. Huberts. Fine. Well I hadn't seen anything as big as the
Byerly's when I drive past it every day and I went, fine. I mean it's like we have to sanity
test it and when we see it on an application and you go, you know. They're hiring. That's
' good to know. It's open house or something. I didn't fine that.
Conrad: I don't think whatever this number is is abusive. I don't think you know if it's, I
' don't know. And again, I'm just looking for something that makes sense and we have gone
up, Matt I agree, but I think we started at something really ridiculous. That meant we
outlawed banners and I don't think that's really been the intent to do. So I'm saying, 4 feet by
' 35. 35 feet probably stretches across a street. Probably on the front of a building, that's a
couple hundred feet wide. It's not much of an impact. It's just not. So again, that's my
feeling on that one. I do throw out another, I think Kate and staff, page 12. General location
' restrictions. In point (c) we said, unless approved by the city.
Aanenson: Well and duplication, okay. We can take out in (a) where it says no sign shall be
' placed...
Conrad: Okay. At the bottom of that page. I guess I was pretty comfortable just with the
' statement. There's been a statement tonight saying well, what about the folks that don't have
many windows. Should we govern that? I guess I'd listen to somebody talking or wants to
' talk to me about governing. You know not having this cover buildings with window areas of
less than 32 square feet of something. I don't know. From a, I don't know. It's another
number and if somebody has some input on that, I'd sure entertain that. I don't think I need
to regulate 32 feet on a building. I guess whoever made that comment, I guess I could go
along with it unless there's a good counter point to it.
' Scott: We're trying to even the playing field.
Conrad: Yeah. See I'm not sure Joe if I agree. People buy buildings based on what they
' see. I guess I don't need to,1 personally don't need to level it. But on the other hand, I don't
need to get into somebody's back pocket either and say, I'm going to manage your 32 feet. I
really don't feel I need to do that so. I may make a motion to that effect that we go down.
' That we do not go down to that area. Under 32 square feet of window area is not regulated
1 32
Planning Commission Meeting • November 16, 1994
by that ordinance. That's probably what I'm going to say unless I hear some discussion
coming back. On page 13, I want (h) deleted. Jeff, I'm sure I just lost your vote on that one
but I really would like to accomplish (h) through a different mechanism and not here. I think
Randy brought up a good point in terms of signage. On Section 20 -1266. 10 days is not
realistic. I can't get Randy to make a sign in.
Scott: Sounds like there's some...
Conrad: No, realistically in that business, if you want a decent sign to replace something,
you're not going to get it done in 10 days so I want to encourage quality. I really agree.
This section to me is probably the most important, or one of the more important ones. I think
we want to regulate signage on how big it is but I think we also want to regulate how well
it's maintained. It seems like we've had the easiest time over the maintenance, or this section
hasn't caused us any problem and it's probably one that has, if I want city staff to be really
monitoring anything in this ordinance, this is the one. This is where we can make an impact.
This is where the citizens do care and this is where I want staff out there looking. That's just
a personal deal but that's major. And the rest, that's real significant. So bouncing that
number up to 30 days seems reasonable and even that's tough; -I think those are the
comments and if I get to make a motion, they're probably going to go that direction.
Farmakes: If you make a motion, on (h) being dropped.
Conrad: I will cover it in terms of.
Farmakes: Will you cover that with a direction to incorporate that into the architectural
standards section?
Conrad: Yeah.
Scott: Diane.
Harberts: I would support comments made by Ladd. Emphasizing that (d) on page S be
amended to read that bus signs are prohibited except at designated transit stops as designated
by SMTC, Southwest Metro Transit Commission. And then to strike, or to amend I guess on
page 11, number 8 to read the same. I guess based on the comments of the public hearing,
on letter 8, I'm going to sit on the fence and see where it goes. Those are my comments.
Ledvina: The comments that were made by the Chamber are all good additions and
modifications to the ordinance that we have here. I would support Ladd's comments,
33
E ,
I
Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
especially as it relates to item (h) on page 13. I do feel that it's appropriate that that issue be
tackled in a different, or using a different mechanism. That's it.
Scott: Okay, can I have a motion?
Conrad: Sure. This is real exciting. Not that we're doing the right thing but it just may not
be back here.
Scott: Hopefully you're properly attired to make this motion then.
Conrad: I make a motion that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the revised
sign ordinance, Article XXVI, as drafted in the staff report. There's not really a date on here
but, okay today's date, with the following changes. On page 1, item 1. We changed the
wording, location of a business to name and service. On page 5. We revised under Section
20- 1255(d), we revise the wording to say, bench signs are prohibited except at designated
transit stops as authorized by the local transit authority. Does that work?
Harberts: Yes, I'll take it.
Conrad: I think legally that's the best way to do it. On page 6, point 9, item (c). Revise the
wording to say, such signs shall be set back not less than 10 feet for signage 10 feet or less.
Staff you're going to have to clean this up. Plus 1 foot of setback for each additional foot of
sign height. On the bottom of page 6, item (g). Last sentence. The word completed would
be changed to sold or leased. Top of page 7, third line down. The word completed would be
changed to sold or leased. Page 8. We would strike point number 7 under (c). We would
strike, and the developer may not apply for a second off premise directional sign permit.
Page 9. Banners shall not exceed 140 square feet, rather than 100. Page 10. Item number 4.
Add from surrounding areas to the end of that sentence.
Scott: Do you want to say residential? Are you talking about a complaint from a resident of
a leasee versus someone who's just driving in...:.
Conrad: Yeah, and I'd leave it open to business complaints as well. Page 11, number 8.
Bench signs are prohibited except at designated transit stops as authorized by the local transit
authority. Page 12, item under Section 20- 1265(a). Staff will make (a) and (c) of this section
consistent with the intent to allow temporary signs in the utility easement when approved by
the city. Letter (g), will stand as is except with a final statement that says, this section does
not apply to buildings with less than 32 square feet of window area Page 13. We're going
to delete (h) altogether but with a note that says, but with a recommendation to the City
Council that staff, with the help of Jeff, review the architectural ordinance in the Highway 5
34
Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
Overlay and determine if the architectural standards should be reviewed by staff and Planning
Commission for a separate city wide ordinance. Section 20 -1266, fifth line down. Change
the number 10 to 30. Page 14, fourth line down. Add after the words, individual
dimensional letters add the words, and logos. That is the end of my motion.
Scott: Okay, is there a second to that motion?
Ledvina: Second.
Scott: Is there any discussion?
Conrad moved, Ledvina seconded that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the
amendment to the City Code, Article XXVI regarding the sign ordinance with the following
changes:
On page 1, item l change the wording, location of a business to name and service. On page
S revise under Section 20- 1255(d) the wording to say, bench signs are prohibited except at
designated transit stops as authorized by the local transit authority. On page 6, point 9, item
(c). Revise the wording to say, such signs shall be set back not less than 10 feet for signage
10 feet or less, plus I foot of setback for each additional foot of sign height. On the bottom
of page 6, item (g). Last sentence. The word completed would be changed to sold or leased.
Top of page 7, third line down. The word completed would be changed to sold or leased.
Page 8, number 7 under (c), strike, and the developer may not apply for a second off premise
directional sign permit. Page 9. Banners shall not exceed 140 square feet, rather than 100.
Page 10. Item number 4. Add from surrounding areas from residents or businesses, to the end
of that sentence. Page 11, number 8. Bench signs are prohibited except at designated transit
stops as authorized by the local transit authority. Page 12, item under Section 20- 1265(a).
Staff will make (a) and (c) of this section consistent with the intent to allow temporary signs
in the utility easement when approved by the city. Letter (g), will stand as is except with a
final statement that says, this section does not 'apply to buildings with less than 32 square feet
of window area. Page 13. We're going to delete (h) altogether but with a note that says, but
with a recommendation to the City Council that staff, with the help of Jeff, review the
architectural ordinance in the Highway 5 Overlay and determine if the architectural standards
should be reviewed by staff and Planning Commission for a separate city wide ordinance.
Section 20 -1266, fifth line down. Change the number 10 to 30. Page 14, fourth line down.
Add after the words, individual dimensional letters add the words, and logos.
All voted in favor and the motion canted una+nimewly.
Scott: City Council?
35
I Planning Commission Meeting - November 16, 1994
' Aanenson: It will be on the 12th.
' Scott: The 12th? I'd like to thank the members of the Chamber of Commerce for coming in
and assisting yet once again. I don't suppose you'll be at the City Council meeting. Thanks
' very much.
' PUBLIC HEARING:
REZONING OF 39 ACRES OF PROPERTY ZONED A2. AGRICULTURAL ESTATE TV
RSF, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, PRELIMINARY PLAT TO CREATE 48 SINGLE
' FAMILY LOTS AND 3 OUTLOTS, A WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT FOR
MITIGATION OF PONDING AREAS, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMrf FOR
ALTERATION OF AREAS WITHIN A FLOOD PLAIN ON PROPERTY LOCATED
' NORTH OF TWIN CITIES & WESTERN RAILROAD TRACKS WEST OF BLUFF
CREEK AND EAST OF TIMBERWOOD ESTATES AND STONE CREEK, CREEKSIDE
ADDITION (FORMERLY HERITAGE FIRST ADDITION). HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT
' COMPANY.
Public Present:
Name Address
' John Dobbs 645 5th Avenue
Lloyd Grooms 1691 Lincoln Avenue
John Dietrich 922 Mainstreet, Hopkins
' Steve McCurry 2050 Oakwood Ridge
Stan Rud 2030 Renaissance Court
Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item.
Harberts: Question. On what page, 25, under subdivision. That number 2. What is that
telling me? Number 2 that has a line through it.
Generous: Oh, I started to renumber this whole thing and then I redecided not to. How you
were going to vote and then...
Harberts: So 2 is included?
Generous: Yes.
36