HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-02-06 Minutes
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION
FEBRUARY 6, 2007
6:00 PM
The work session meeting was called to order at 6:10 pm by Chairperson, Marlaine Szurek.
Roll Call: Commission Members present-Thompson, Fiorendino, Peterson, and Szurek.
Schmitt arrived at 6:20 pm
Also present were Jeff Sargent (City Planner), Shelley Hanson (Secretary), and Gary Peterson (Council
Liaison).
BUSINESS ITEMS
A.Proposal to eliminate the requirement of a Conditional Use Permit for Seasonal Outdoor
Sales
As previously discussed, staff proposes an amendment of the Zoning Code regarding the
elimination of the requirement for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for all future Seasonal
Outdoor Sales activities.
The seasonal Outdoor sales applications received by the city are generally those from
companies that have been conducting the same business in the same location for several
years. In the 2006 season, three of the nine Conditional Use Permits that were processed by
the Planning Commission and the City Council were proposals for greenhouses throughout
the city. Those three companies have conducted 31 combined years of business in the City
of Columbia Heights.
Linder’s Greenhouse, which locates in the Rainbow Parking Lot, has done so for the past 17
years. Each year, the application is identical to the previous year’s. The redundancy of
applying for and receiving a CUP for this type of use, wastes the Planning Commission and
City Council’s time.
A possible solution is to eliminate the requirement for a CUP for Seasonal Outdoor Sales.
To do this, the City Council would have to amend the Zoning Code to move the Seasonal
Outdoor Sales use from a Conditional Use to a Permitted Use. It is also suggested that a
definition of Seasonal Outdoor Sales be added to the Zoning Code in order to specify the
types of businesses that the ordinance amendment would pertain to.
Then city staff would process the proposals for all future Seasonal Outdoor Sales. Staff also
proposes the requirement of a license to sell merchandise in a temporary structure during
these occurrences. All other previous requirements of a Seasonal Outdoor Sales Use would
be enforced.
Discussion by the members:
Fiorendino questioned the process that would be followed so this could be handled
administratively by staff. Sargent explained that this type of use would be changed to a
“permitted use” and that we would issue a license to operate this type of business rather than
going through a CUP process. There was a discussion regarding what type of license would
be issued for this use. It may be possible to license them as a Peddler operation or we may
Page 2
have to amend the license ordinance to add a category specifically for greenhouse sales.
Staff will check with the City Attorney to see how to proceed with the licensing part of this
change. The commission members felt a fee between $100-$200 would be fair to operate
this type of business, based on what they have been charged in the past for the CUP.
It was decided to move ahead and hold the public hearing at the next meeting in March to
amend the Zoning Code.
B.Proposal to set stricter standards on the use of Temporary Signage throughout the City
Staff proposes the Commission discuss amending the Zoning Code regarding temporary
signage to better implement the intent of the goals of the Comprehensive Plan and the Design
th
Guidelines that were adopted for the Central Avenue and 40 Avenue corridors.
The current zoning code allows for temporary signage that is not consistent with the intent of
the Comprehensive Plan or Design Guidelines. The current code allows for clutter that is
aesthetically unappealing. A recent survey of Central Avenue revealed that there are
currently 112 temporary signs along the 2-mile stretch of road, not including those used in
Hilltop. Sargent presented several photos of examples of temporary signage at various
locations in the city.
There is a lack of effective regulation in the following areas:
Sign Placement-currently temporary signs are allowed anywhere on the building. It does not
address the number of signs, nor the length of time they are allowed to be displayed. This
contradicts the intent of the Design Guidelines, which focuses on enhancing the building’s
architectural features.
Sign Color-the current code does not regulate the colors used on temporary signs. The
Design guidelines require colors that would complement the existing structure for permanent
signage. However, it does not address temporary sign colors.
Number of Signs-The current sign code allows a number of wall signs, but caps the total
allowable square footage of all signs depending on the building frontage. Any number of
temporary signs are allowed as long as each one is no more than 60 square feet I size.
Freestanding Signs-the current code allows for any number of freestanding signs, as long as
they do not exceed 8 square feet in size. The sign code does not regulate where the signs
may be located, the materials they are made of, the professionalism of the sign, or how long
the sign may be erected for.
Without effective regulation to establish minimum standards to guide the use of temporary
th
signage, 40 Avenue and Central Avenue will continue to have a shoddy, unkempt
appearance.
Page 3
Sargent explained that we first must identify the community’s goals for aesthetics and image
found in the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the goals; the purpose
of the zoning ordinance is to guide private activity toward the achievement of those goals.
The City’s Comprehensive Plan indicates several goals for the economic and commercial
vitality of the city. These include:
1.Establishing and maintaining a strong sense of community.
2.Strengthening the image of the community as a desirable place to live & work.
3.Enhancing the physical appearance of the community.
4.Improving the image of commercial areas as friendly and safe environments for
residents and visitors.
The implementation of these goals centers on the City’s ability to redevelop the commercial and
retail sectors to establish friendly, working and living environments in Columbia Heights. The
Comp Plan indicates that a coalition should be formed to develop the framework to implement
these goals. A coalition was formed in 2002 to draft the Design Guidelines required for future
th
development and redevelopment along 40 Avenue and Central Avenue. The Design Guidelines
establish a set of minimum standards for developers to follow when constructing new buildings
or additions to existing ones.
The objective in the Design Guidelines regarding signage was to make them compatible with the
style, composition, materials, colors, and details of the building. They should be an integral part
of building and site design. The Design Guidelines regulate such things as the types of signs to
be used, the shape of the signs, the placement of signs on the building, the colors and materials
the signs could incorporate, and the illumination of the signs. The Guidelines incorporate these
specific criteria in order to enhance the aesthetic appeal of the city.
Thompson stated that he thought it was necessary to make changes, but thinks they should be
thought out so that businesses are not impacted negatively.
th
The question was raised whether the changes suggested are for Central Avenue and 40 Avenue,
or for the whole city. Sargent explained it would be applied citywide. Timelines for businesses
to bring signage into compliance was also discussed.
Sargent said it would be necessary to better define the various types of signage used throughout
the city to eliminate any confusion when enforcement becomes an issue.
Fiorendino commented that he thought the use, or mis-use, of window signage defeats the
purpose of requiring windows in the construction of the building in the first place.
Gary Peterson brought up how window signage is abused by the City owned Liquor Stores. Once
this ordinance is amended, they will have to comply with the new requirements also. And he
cautioned not to pass restrictions that can’t be enforced. He reminded members how hard it is to
administer these regulations based on what has happened regarding signage in the past.
Page 4
The Commission members discussed the following possible changes that staff suggested as a
starting point:
1.Regulate the number of temporary signs allowed for each business.
This would enable the city to control the number of temporary wall signs displayed at any
given time. A permit process would be needed to control this. A recommendation would
be to allow 5 temporary wall signs per business per calendar year, and no more than one
temporary wall sign displayed at any given time.
Members agreed with this idea. Their recommendation would be to allow 4
temporary wall signs per business per year, and no more than two temporary wall
signs could be displayed at any given time.
2.Regulate the amount of time that a temporary wall sign may be displayed for.
Temporary signs should be limited to a 30 day display period per sign. This would ensure
that the temporary wall signs were not in place on a year round basis.
Members agreed with this idea. And as stated above, this will be limited to 4 signs
during a calendar year.
3.Limit the size of the temporary sign.
The current sign code allows temporary wall signs to be no more than 60 square feet in
area. A recommendation would be to decrease the maximum size to 40 square feet. This
would help proportion the sign in a more aesthetic manner on buildings within the city.
Members agreed that temporary wall signage or banners should be limited to 32 sf
thnd
for the downtown area (39 – 42 Central Ave) and to 48 sf in other areas of town.
4.Language should be included in the Code that temporary wall signs may not be used for
permanent wall signage.
Currently the sign code does not regulate the requirement of a permanent wall sign for a
business. The intent of temporary signage is to promote an event, sale, etc. Temporary
signage should not be used for permanent means.
Members agreed, this should be added to the code. They want to make sure it is
adequately defined to distinguish the difference between temporary and permanent
signs. And they do not want temporary signage to be used as permanent signage.
5.Create provision for sandwich board sign.
A sandwich board sign is a freestanding sign. Once defined, the city could regulate the
types of building materials of the sign, the professionalism of the sign, the location of the
sign, and the number of such signs to be allowed per business. This would reduce the
unsightly clutter in the City.
Members agreed to allow sandwich board signs, but to limit them to one per
business, to specify where on the property they can be located, that they be limited
Page 5
to 8 sf, that they are limited to a certain height, and that they be professional in
appearance.
6.Disallow “stick in the ground” signs.
This would reduce clutter and increase the aesthetic appeal of the City.
Members agreed these need to be prohibited. The only type of freestanding signs
that will be allowed are the sandwich board signs.
Additional discussion by the members:
There was also a discussion on window signage and how unsightly it is. Our current code allows for
window signage up to 25% of the window area. Sargent explained this hasn’t been enforced to date, but
probably needs to be since several businesses have been abusing it. Sargent stated that he thinks any
amendment needs to define “what constitutes a window area” and what are acceptable colors. Members
wanted to prohibit neon/fluorescent colors. Sargent said he would research what other cities have
included in their ordinances regarding window signage and include the necessary language in the draft
he will present to the members at the March meeting.
th
It was decided to hold another work session prior to the regular meeting on March 6. Sargent will
present the members with the draft amendment changes for Signage and the issue of parking stall
lengths will be discussed at the work session. The regular meeting to follow will include a Public
Hearing regarding the requirement of a CUP for greenhouse sales sites, along with other business items
that come in.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:50 pm. All Ayes.
Respectfully submitted,
Shelley Hanson
Secretary