Loading...
4.d) Memo Signs 10.6.15 Memorandum To: Scandia Planning Commission Reference: Sign Ordinance—Public Hearing Copies To: Kristina Handt, City Administrator Brenda Eklund, City Clerk Project No.: 15745.000 From: Sherri Buss, RLA AICP, Planner Routing: Date: September 10, 2015 The Planning Commission discussed potential updates to the City’s sign ordinance and Architectural Design Guidelines at its meetings on July 7, August 4, and September 1 in response to comments from the Economic Development Authority that some of the City’s sign regulations should be changed to better support community events and local businesses. The EDA discussed the revised ordinance and guidelines at its meeting on August 10, and provided some additional comments for Planning Commission consideration. After those meetings, City staff received information about a recent Supreme Court decision (Reed v. Town of Gilbert, June 18, 2015) that dramatically impacts how local governments may regulate signs. The City Attorney has provided a memo that summarizes the impacts of the decision on Scandia’s ordinance. The Planner also discussed the decision and its impacts with an attorney at the League of Minnesota Cities, and he provided further comment on the decision and offered some insights on how to address some specific issues in the ordinance and sample language. Staff have updated the ordinance and Design Guidelines to address the both the Commission’s comments at the September meeting and the results of Reed v. Town of Gilbert.  The major result of the Court decision is that the City may not restrict signage based on the topic or content of the sign. Therefore all regulation related to specific sign topics and content have been removed, with one exception recommended by the League attorney. Specific changes are discussed below. The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on October 6 on the proposed amendment to the Sign Ordinance, attached. The updates to City of Scandia Architectural Design Guidelines will be included in the public hearing, since the Design Guidelines have been adopted in the Zoning Ordinance. Sign Regulations Memo Page 2 October 6, 2015 Scandia Planning Commission Ordinance Update The changes that the Planner made to the proposed ordinance amendment based on the discussion at the Planning Commission meeting on September 1 include the following:  Minor revisions to definition of Abandoned Sign to eliminate references to a specific use.  Added a definition for Backlit (Illuminated) Signs. Most ordinances refer to these signs as “Illuminated Signs.”  Revised the definition of Off-Premises Sign to take out references to specific sign content.  Added a definition for Sandwich-Board Sign.  Moved the sections on permitted sign types to Item (2) from Item (4).  Removed the language: “Backlit signs are permitted on commercial parcels that abut State Highway 97 in the VMU A and VMU B Districts and on all parcels in the R COMM District, except that backlit signs are not permitted on parcels located within the Saint Croix River District.”  Changed Item 4 (K) 3 to include 50% of the view of a lake, etc.  Added Pennants to the list of signs not permitted in the AG C, AP, GR and VN Districts  Revised item (6)(C) to include a reference to Sandwich-Board signs and to permit temporary signs for up to 34 consecutive days  Revised Item (8) to specify that the signs may be located in the VMU A and VMU B Districts Discussion with Attorney from the League of Minnesota Cities The Planning Commission requested that the Planner discuss two issues with the Attorney from the League of Minnesota Cities that has been working with other communities on updating sign ordinances. Jed Burkett noted that he is not providing legal advice, but provided the following comments on those issues: Does the Supreme Court decision permit Temporary Signs and references to dates on signs? Jed stated that the Supreme Court ruling permits signs to include information about “time, place, and manner”. His understanding is that temporary signs may be permitted in ordinances, and that sign content may reference dates or time periods. However, the City could not regulate the content of temporary signs to allow them only for community events, advertising, providing directions, or other similar content. Can the ordinance regulate who is allowed to be identified on off-premises signs? Jed stated that his understanding of the Supreme Court ruling is that the City may regulate the location, size, or other physical characteristics of off-premises signs (and other signs), but it cannot limit the content of the sign to include only businesses, only local businesses, a specific number of businesses or any other similar content limitation. If the City includes off-site signs as permitted signs in its ordinance, non-businesses entities could have such signs, businesses or other entities from outside Scandia could be identified on the signs, etc. Scandia Architectural Design Guidelines Update The Planner updated the Scandia Architectural Design Guidelines to be consistent with the proposed ordinance amendment.