HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/08/2008
AGENDA
CITY OF MAPLEWOOD
COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
Tuesday, January 8, 2008
6:00 P.M.
Council Chambers - Maplewood City Hall
1830 County Road BEast
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Agenda
4. Approval of Minutes: December 11, 2007
5. Unfinished Business: On-Site Dynamic Display Sign Code Discussion
6. Design Review: Concept Review - Maplewood Mall Dynamic Display Sign
7. Visitor Presentations:
8. Board Presentations:
9. Staff Presentations:
a. Comprehensive Plan Update
10. Adjourn
DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 11, 2007
I. CALL TO ORDER
Vice-Chairperson Ledvina called the rneeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Board member John Dernko
Vice-Chairperson Matt Ledvina
Chairperson Linda Olson
Board rnember Ananth Shankar
Board member Matt Wise
Present
Present
Present at 6:15
Present
Present
Staff Present:
Shann Finwall, Planner
Ginny Gaynor, Open Space Coordinator
Also Present:
Jirn Beardsley, Environmental and Natural Resources Commission
Ginny Yingling, Environmental and Natural Resources Commission
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Board member Shankar rnoved to approve the agenda as submitted.
Board mernber Wise seconded.
The motion passed.
Ayes - all
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a. November 27, 2007
Board member Dernko rnoved approval of the amended rninutes of Novernber 27, 2007, as
submitted.
Board member Wise seconded
The motion passed.
Ayes - all
V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None
VI. DESIGN REVIEW
None
VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
None
VIII. BOARD PRESENTATIONS
a. December 4, 2007 Planning Commission Meeting: Dynamic Display Sign Code
Amendment
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 11-27-2007
2
Board rnernber Ledvina reported on this meeting. He said that the planning commission
requested clarification on the recommended display time change from eight to twelve
seconds. Mr. Ledvina said the commission agreed with the change to twelve seconds.
b. December 10, 2007 City Council Meeting: Dynarnic Display Sign Code Amendment
Mr. Ledvina said when he attended this meeting, the dynamic display sign code amendment
was not listed on the agenda. He said there was a second reading of an amendment to the
prohibited sign code on the agenda that night which passed, but the council did not consider
the dynamic sign code amendment.
Mr. Ledvina said the council discussed tabled the conditional use permit for the expansion
of the billboard on Highway 36 and White Bear Avenue for a dynamic display sign at this
meeting, but he did not comment on that issue since the CUP was not a board topic.
StaWexplained that the next possible date to schedule the first reading of the dynamic
display sign code amendment for council consideration will be at the first council meeting in
January.
IX. STAFF PRESENTATIONS
a. Wetland Ordinance Discussion
Planner Shann Finwall presented the staff report. Ms. Finwall explained that the proposed
draft wetland ordinance is being presented for the board's consideration.
Ginny Gaynor, open space coordinator, explained the details and proposed changes in the
ordinance. Ms. Gaynor said the major changes proposed were made to the classification
system of the ordinance, based on the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District's
(RWMWD) adoption of the Minnesota Routine Assessment Method (MnRAM) wetland
classification system.
Ms. Gaynor explained the A+ Class is one additional class that is being recommended for
adoption, which would be used for the highest quality wetlands. Ms. Gaynor said 50 feet is
the minimum buffer being proposed for adoption in any of the buffers and averages.
Board member Ledvina said he recognizes that there are several agencies that have
requirements for filling or altering wetlands, but he recommends that a statement be added
to the proposed ordinance stating that a variance is required any time a wetland is proposed
for filling or alteration.
Ms. Gaynor agreed that Mr. Ledvina's suggestion of a clarifying statement requiring a
variance permit for filling or alteration in a wetland should be added to the ordinance.
Jim Beardsley of the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission said that since the
state requires a permit to alter any wetlands, a requirement was not included in the
ordinance. Mr. Beardsley agreed a requirement statement should be added to the draft.
Board member Ledvina said there have been instances in the past of filling in a wetland
without a variance and he feels it would be prudent to include a variance requirement in the
ordinance so any filling or alteration would be done appropriately. Mr. Ledvina also
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 11-27-2007
3
suggested a minor administrative change to move number five regarding variances to
number eight in the ordinance.
Mr. Beardsley said this shows the importance of the review by the community design review
board and planning commission for this ordinance proposal and thanked Mr. Ledvina for his
suggestions.
At this time, Chairperson Linda Olson took over the duties of chairing the meeting as Vice-Chairperson
Ledvina needed to leave the meeting.
Board member Olson said she did not see any clarification on managing weeds in wetlands
and also questioned how the city and county overlapping wetlands would be managed.
Ms. Gaynor responded that any wetlands in Maplewood would follow the requirements of
the Maplewood wetland ordinance. Ms. Gaynor also said in response to management of
weeds in wetlands that weeds listed on the state's noxious weed law would apply in
Maplewood and that each situation would be considered individually for the best strategy.
Board member Olson said she is generally in agreement with the draft of the wetland
ordinance.
Board member Wise asked what criteria was used to determine buffer areas for those
differing from RWMWD's code.
Mr. Beardsley responded that it was a long process of reviewing various literature on the
criteria for determining an effective buffer. Mr. Beardsley said that most of the literature
reviewed considered 50 feet as the minimum distance in order to protect a wetland.
Mr. Wise asked whether the same buffer exemptions would be allowed for commercial
properties.
Planner Finwall responded that the commercial exemption issue was considered and it was
determined that the city should allow exemptions for residential property owners to ensure
affordability to these residents in being able to upgrade their home to make them livable
through phases of their lives. Commercial property owners generally have access and the
opportunity to hire architects and explore unique alternatives.
Chairperson Olson expressed her appreciation for the opportunity to review and comment
on this proposed ordinance draft, since the criteria and conditions are issues that the board
must consider when making recommendations.
b. Cancellation of Second CDRB meeting in December
Planner Shann Finwall reminded the board of the cancellation of their second December
meeting and that the next meeting will be the second Tuesday in January.
X. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Greg Copeland, City Manager
Shann Finwall, AICP, Planner
On-Site Dynamic Display Sign Ordinance Discussion
January 3, 2008 for the January 8 CDRB Meeting
INTRODUCTION
City staff is requesting feedback from the community design review board (CDRB) on
the creation of an on-site dynamic display sign ordinance. Recent advances in the sign
industry have introduced a variety of technologies to the outdoor advertising arena,
including the use of light emitting diode (LED) signs (dynamic displays). These signs are
becoming a highly sought-after means of advertising for businesses and are also
becoming increasingly affordable. As such, the city will likely see more requests for
these types 'of signs in the near future. It is important that the city review this new
technology as it relates to on-premise signs, as we did for off-premise signs in 2007, to
ensure there are no negative impacts to the surrounding properties and to protect the
publiC health, safety, and welfare of the city as a whole.
BACKGROUND
November 27 and December 4, 2007, the CDRB and the planning commission
recommended approval of a prohibited and dynamic display sign ordinance amendment
based on a settlement agreement with Clear Channel on the installation of an LED
billboard sign in Maplewood. The board and commission recommended that staff bring
back information on on-site dynamic display signs for a possible ordinance amendment
in the near future.
DISCUSSION
Existing Sign Ordinance Language
On December 10, 2008, based on the settlement agreement with Clear Channel and the
city attorney's interpretation of the city's sign ordinance in relation to the LED billboard
signs, the city council adopted an amendment to the city's prohibited sign ordinance as
follows:
The following signs are prohibited in all zoning districts: ...Signs that have
blinking, flashing or fluttering lights or that change in brightness or color. Signs
that give public service information, such as time and temperature are exempt.
The amended prohibited sign ordinance language not only allows Clear Channel and
other billboard companies to have off-premise LED signs, it also opens the door to on-
premise signs with this technology, as long as the sign does not blink, flash or flutter
(I.e., changed from one sign face to another without rapid movement). Alternatively, any
permitted sign would be allowed to blink, flash, or flutter only if used primarily for a public
service message. In these two examples, the Myth sign would conform to the new
ordinance if the sign message changed from one sign face to another without rapid
movements. Or the sign could blink, flash, flutter, etc., if used at least 31 minutes out of
every hour for a public service message. For this reason it is very important for the city
to consider possible regulations on these types of signs before the city issues a permit
for such a sign.
Regulation of On-Site Dynamic Display Signs
League of Minnesota Cities
In July 2007 the League of Minnesota Cities released an executive summary regarding
the regulation of dynamic signs (Attachment 1). After review of the new technology and
the federal and state laws, they determined that cities can take a number of macro-level
approaches to regulations including a complete or near-complete ban on dynamic
display signs; allow dynamic display signs only with restrictions such as minimum
display time, allowing only a percentage of a sign to change, or text size limitations;
allowing different types of dynamic displays in zoning districts, such as allowing brighter
dynamic signs in a downtown business district than in residential neighborhoods;
offering incentive programs to billboard companies to allow dynamic displays in
exchange for removal of non-conforming signs; or encourage dynamic displays (some
communities like the clean, new look of dynamic signs and encourage them to remove
old blighted and poorly maintained signs).
SRF Research
SRF Consulting Group conducted a study on dynamic signs for the City of Minnetonka in
June 2007. The study was requested by Minnetonka after concerns on the installation of
two LED billboards by Clear Channel within their city. The CDRB has reviewed this
study previously during the ordinance amendment for off-site dynamic displays.
Attached again for review is the portion of the study which pertains to regulatory
measures recommended for dynamic displays (Attachment 2). SRF recommends
eleven areas of consideration when drafting an ordinance including, but not limited to,
identifying specific areas where dynamic display signs should be prohibited, acceptable
level of operational modes (I.e., static with no transitions, static with fade or dissolve,
etc.), minimum distance requirements between signs, etc.
City of Minnetonka
In June 2007 the City of Minnetonka adopted a dynamic display ordinance. Attached for
review is the staff report and ordinance amendment submitted by the Minnetonka city
attorney, community development director, and city planner (Attachment 3). This report
and ordinance amendment gives valuable information on the regulation of dynamic
display signs. Minnetonka's ordinance allows on-site dynamic display signs on up to 35
percent of a freestanding sign, and the message may change every 20 minutes.
City of Eagan
In October 2007 the City of Eagan adopted a similar ordinance (Attachment 4) which
allows dynamic display signs for on-site and off-site signs. On-site dynamic displays are
allowed on freestanding signs in Eagan if they are not the predominant feature, if they do
not change or move more often than once every 20 minutes, and must meet graphic
height requirements based on the speed limit in front of the sign.
2
RECOMMENDATION
City staff recommends that the CDRB review the attached background material
regarding dynamic display signs and be prepared to discuss and make
recommendations on an on-site dynamic display sign ordinance. City staff will take this
feedback and draft an ordinance based on the suggestions for review and
recommendation by the board at the next CDRB meeting.
p:ord\sign code\1-8-08 CDRB
Attachments:
1. League of Minnesota Cities - Regulating Dynamic Signage
2. SRF Consulting Group - Portions of the Dynamic Display Research Related to Driver Distraction
3. City of Minnetonka - June 25, 2007, Staff Report and Dynamic Display Ordinance
4. City of Eagan - October 2, 2007, Dynamic Display Ordinance
3
~ms~+ ,
LEAGUE OF
MINNESOTA
CITIES
CONNECTING & INNOVATING
SIJ'lCE 1915
REGULATING DYNAMIC SIGNAGE
Executive summary
Cities have authority and responsibility to regulate dynamic signs as appropriate for each
community. There is no single correct approach to regulation. Because the regulation of signs
involves the First Amendment, courts hold sign regulations to a higher standard than most land use
regulations. Cities still have considerable discretion to regulate, as long as they do so reasonably
and without regard to sign content.
Introduction
In the fall of 2006, a number of Minnesota cities were surprised by the appearance of large
electronic billboards akin to giant television screens. These signs are the next generation of sign
displays with the ability to feature changing images and movement-known collectively as
dynamic signs. Attempts to regulate them resulted in litigation in at least one community-
Minnetonka. In developing a regulatory response, Minnetonka partnered with the League of
Minnesota Cities to commission a study, conducted by SRF Engineering, on the impact of such
dynamic signs on traffic safety. This memorandum discusses the legal framework of regulating
dynamic signage in light ofthe recent litigation and study.
Regulatory framework
While the federal and state government can enact and have enacted laws regulating signs, those
regulations only provide minimum standards. Courts have. explicitly recognized that cities have the
ability to regulate signs, including dynamic signs, more restrictively.
There is no uniform system of regulation that cities must follow. Each community is different and
has different needs that local ordinances may reflect. Such regulations must meet the same basic
legal tests for all sign regulation.
Most city land use decisions get a very deferential standard of review known as rational basis
review. Under this level of review, city decision will be upheld if they have any rational basis.
Because sign regulations implicate free speech rights which are protected by the First Amendment,
they are subjected to higher levels of scrutiny. The highest level of scrutiny, called strict scrutiny,
applies when government tries to regulate based on the content of speech. The only content-based
sign regulation that courts have upheld is treating off-premise signs (billboards) differently than
on-premise signs that advertise the business on the same property.
One distinction that may seem like it is content based, but our federal court of appeals has said is
not, is a ban on dynamic signs with an exception for time and temperature displays. The court held
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES
INSURANCE TRUST
1.. UNlVIlUIIT AVE. WEST PIIOIIIo (651) 281-1200 fAX, (651) 281-1298
Jl'. PAUL, MN 551Q3.-~ 1'OLL mm (800) 925-1122 _WWW.LMC.OIlG
I
that because of their unique nature, allowing only time and temp displays is not a prohibited
content-based regulation. It is important not to overstate this, however. Regulations that go further
and carve out a broader exception for "public information" are likely to be struck down as
impermissibly content-based.
Sign regulations that are not content based are subject to intermediate scrutiny, which tests
whether the regulation is substantially related to a significant government interest. This roughly
translates to "regulate for a good reason." Cities should take care that the scope of the regulation is
not excessive when viewed in light of all of the regulatory objectives, and that they do not create
exceptions to the regulations that cannot be justified by reference to one or more of the city's
articulated objectives
Big-picture regulatory tools
The available research on traffic impacts supports significant content-neutral limits or even bans
on dynamic signs for safety reasons. The studies confirm that billboards can tend to distract
drivers, dynamic features contribute to the distraction, and even short distractions can increase the
risk of accigents. This is not surprising as promotional materials put out by sign companies
themselves boast the signs' ability to hold viewer attention as a benefit of dynamic signs.
Safety is only one concern. Cities may also regulate signs based on values, preferences, and
aesthetics. Not every sign is appropriate in every community or every neighborhood. Not every
community wishes to become Las Vegas or even downtown Minneapolis.
Cities can take a number of different macro-level approaches to regulation. Some examples
include:
1. Complete or near-complete bans that do not allow dynamic signs at all.
2. Allow dynamic signs with restrictions such as minimum display time, allowing only a
percentage of a sign to change, or text size limitations.
3. Allow different things in different zoning districts, such as allowing brighter dynamic signs in a
downtown business district than in residential neighborhoods.
4. Offering incentive programs to billboard companies to allow dynamic signs in exchange for
removal of non-conforming static signs.
5. Encourage dynamic displays. Some communities like the clean, new look of dynamic signs and
encourage them to remove old blighted and poorly maintained signs.
Regulating sigu aspects
A content-neutral regulation that regulates dynamic signage will be subject to intermediate
scrutiny, so a community must show a regulation is substantially related to a significant
government interest. In plain language, you must articulate what problem a regulation is intended
to address and how the regulation addresses it.
There are at least six aspects of dynamic signs that regulations may address:
1. Duration of messagesl speed of changeover. Studies have described the Zeigamik effect, a
psychological need to see a task through to its end. In the case of dynamic signs, a driver's desire
to read an entire message before it changes or to complete a scrolling message has been shown to
2
z..
negatively impact drivers' tendencies to maintain a constant speed or remain in a lane. To address
these issues, many cities have imposed minimum message durations that might vary depending on
community preference and traffic conditions.
Z. Motion, animation, and video. Motion can range from simple visual effects to full realistic
video. Motion can extend the period of time a driver will keep watching a sign, increasing
distractedness. Cities may prohibit motion or limit it either to specific areas or to specific
characteristics such as a motion time frame calibrated to traffic speed.
3. Brightness. Brightness can be a safety factor, particularly at night, as sudden brightness can be
distracting or diminish night vision. A number of communities limit brightness based on time of
day and by color displayed. This can be difficult to quantifY and measure.
4. Sign placement and spacing. The number of signs and their location can be a big factor in
driver awareness. A large number of signs can increase distractedness. Poorly placed signs may
block views or cause distraction in unsafe areas. Cities may impose site standards and spacing
requirefi!ents. These may present regulatory challenges as spacing may be dependent on the
actions of neighboring property owners.
5. Size of signs. Size can have impacts in several ways. Too big, and it obstructs views and
distracts. Too small, and it takes longer to read and encourages sign users to sequence messages.
Cities may limit dynamic signs or the percentage of a sign that can be dynamic.
6. Text size and legibility. Signs that are difficult to read invite increased driver focus. Regulations
can, for example, require minimum sizes based on road speed.
The specifics of how to regulate each of these aspects is up to each community. Because review of
regulations must face intermediate scrutiny, cities have to take some extra steps when drafting and
adopting ordinances.
For each aspect regulated, cities should consider adopting findings or local studies that articulate
the reason and any support for the regulation. The SRF study and other materials can provide a
scientific basis for a number of regulatory steps. In addition, cities may choose more stringent
regulation in order to take a conservative approach to protecting safety.
Moving forw31'd
It is recommended that cities think about dynamic signs as early as possible. Regardless of your
city's approach, it is better to make a rational choice rather than by having dynamic signs arrive
before you have thought about the issue. Once the signs are up, Minnesota's nonconfonrung use
law arguably grants them "grandfathered" status, with a narrow exception for safety.
If your city would like more information about regulating dynamic signs, Paul Merwin, LMCIT
Senior Land Use Attorney, can provide assistance and refer you to more information and
resources. Contact Paul at (651) 281-1278 or pmenvin(c7;Imc.org.
3
:;
Disclaimer: This memorandum is intended as general information only and should not be read as
legal advice or as creating an attorney-client relationship. This memo addresses general concerns
and has not been reviewed in the context of a specific client or situation. This memo was drafted as
a loss control document and is intended to avoid conflicts rather than form an opinion as to the
legality or defensibility of any action.
Last updated: 7-26-07
4
Li
.~chl'\lt\t Z-
~M\Q~ O~ 5~ ~~~h
For this reason, state departments of transportation have carefully studied the design and location
of dynamic signs within the highway right-of-way. Their goal is to convey a message to the
traveling public in a manner that is as straight-forward and readable as possible without being a
visual "attraction". The goal of the outdoor advertising sign is to be a visual attraction outside
the right-of-way, possibly making it a source of driver distraction. Nevertheless, the actual
change in crash rates influenced by the presence of any specific device has not been quantified in
a manner that fully isolates the impacts of an electronic sign. Recent studies conducted by
FHW A and others have cited the need for further research.
In the interest of promoting public safety, this report recommends that electronic signs be viewed
as a form of driver distraction and a public safety issue. Therefore, the ordinance
recommendations identified here should be considered. These recommendations should be
reviewed in the future as additional research becomes available.
With respect to regulatory measures for electronic outdoor advertising signs, it is important that
local govelTIffients take a thorough approach to updating their ordinances to address this issue.
For example, an ordinance that addresses sign motion, but does not address brightness and
intensity levels may leave the door open for further controversy. This report seeks to identify all
of the aspects of electronic outdoor advertising devices that are subject to regulation. It does not
specifically state what those regulations should be (e.g. the size of electronic signs), since these
are all things that policy makers and staff must take into careful consideration. Further, as driver
distraction and resulting influences on safety do not, in a practical sense, distinguish between on-
premise and off-premise signage, this distinction is not highlighted in the recommendations
below.
Regulatory Measures recommeuded for consideration
To properly address the issue of dynamic signage, it is recommended that the sign code address
the following:
1. Identify specific areas where dynamic signs are prohibited. This would typically be done
by specifying certain zoning districts where they are not allowed under. any
circumstances. If dynamic signs are to be allowed in specific areas, this could be done by
zoning district (only higher level commercial districts are recommended for
consideration) or by zoning overlay related to specific purposes (e.g. entertaimnent or
sports facility district) or to specific roadway types.
2. Determine the acceptable level of operational modes in conjunction with such zoning
districts or overlays. The various levels include:
a. Static display only, with no transitions between messages,
b. Static display with fade or dissolve transitions, or transitions that do not have the
effect of moving text or images,
c. Static display with scrolling, traveling, spinning, zooming in, or similar special
effects that have the appearance of movement, animation, or changing in size, or get
revealed sequentially rather than all at once (e.g. letters dropping into place, etc.), and
~t~~,~~~;'e~~!~~.~~
, ~~e.ecI"Ui ~I\ttd ~ brwr \)1~"If_"tiOl\
d. Full animation and video.
3. If one of the forms of static display is identified as the preferred operational mode, a
minimum display time should be established. This display time should correspond to the
operation roadway speed (rather than posted speed limit), allowing at most one image
transition during the time that the sign if visible to a driver traveling at the operational
speed.
If a shorter minimum display time is considered, the effects of message sequencing
should be considered. Wait intervals of more than 1-2 seconds between sequenced
messages have the potential to become more of a distraction as viewers wait impatiently
for the next screen, in an effort to view the complete message.
4. If the community wishes to accommodate animation or video in some or all locations
where "dynamic are permitted, a minimum and maximum duration of a video image
should be established. The purpose for establishing a time limit is to ensure that the
message is conveyed in a short, concise time frame that does not cause slowing of traffic
to allow drivers to see the entire message. Given the creativity of advertising, these video
images may be seen as a form of entertainment, and people typically like to see an
entertaining message through to the end.
Differentiate between zoning districts where dynamic signs are permitted by right, and
zoning districts, overlay districts, or special districts where they should only be allowed
through the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. A CUP would involve public
notification and review and approval by the Planning Commission. Other options would
include a design review board or other dispute resolution process.
5. Consider the establishment of minimum distance requirements between electronic
outdoor advertising devices in relation to the zoning district or roadway context in which
the signs are allowed.
6. Consider size limitations on dynamic signs for zoning districts where they are allowed.
This may vary from one district to another.
7. Consider if dynamic signs are allowed independently, or if they must be incorporated into
the body of another sign, and therefore become a limited percentage of the overall sign
face.
8. Establish a requirement for that all dynamic signs that emit light be equipped with
mechanisms that allow brightness to be set at specific nit levels and respond accurately to
changing light conditions. The City must establish the authority to disable or turn the
device off if it malfunctions in a manner that creates excessive glare or intensity that
causes visual interference or blind spots, and require that the device remain inoperable
until such time that the owner demonstrates to the appropriate city official that the device
is in satisfactory working condition. If such technology is not available, consideration
should be give to banning dynamic signs that emit light until such time as the technology
allows brightness levels to be precisely controlled.
27
A30 Dynamic Signage Ordinance
z..
9. Consider maximum brightness levels that correlate to ambient (day or night condition,
lighting of surrounding context) light levels. A maximum daytime and separate
nighttime nit/footcandle level should be established. Consider wording that requires the
sign to automatically adjust its nit level based on ambient light conditions.
10. Consider a requirement for a written certification from the sign manufacturer that the
individual sign's maximum light intensity has been preset not to exceed the maximum
daytime illumination levels established by the code, and that the maximum intensity level
is protected from end user manipulation by password protected software or other method
approved by the appropriate city official.
II. Require sign owners to provide an accurate field method of ensuring that maximum light
levels are not exceeded. If such a method cannot technically be provided, consider
banning dynamic signs that emit light until such time as the technology is available.
28
A31 Dynamic Signage Ordinance .3
AitQ.c.nmet\t ~
City Council Agenda Item #14_
Meeting of June 25, 2007
Brief Description: An ordinance regulating dynamic signs.
Recommended Action: Adopt the ordinance.
Background
The city council and planning commission discussed the regulation of dynamic signs at
its study session on May 14, 2007. Staff has prepared an ordinance incorporating the
direction from that meeting. The major issues are discussed below.
In formulating the proposed ordinance, staff consulted with SRF Consulting and Gerald
Wachtel, a national expert on changeable message signs. Their final report is attached
on pages A 1-A42.
General Framework
The easiest approach to dynamic signs, from both a legal and enforcement standpoint,
is to either prohibit all of them or allow them with no restrictions. Instead, the ordinance
incorporates a balanced approach to dynamic sign regulation that protects community
interests, while recognizing the need to reasonably accommodate evolving sign
technologies.
The term "dynamic" display is defined in the ordinanceto identify all displays that have
changing messages, regardless of the means. By avoiding descriptions that identify the
type of change, such as "electronic," the ordinance can better deal with future
technologies that have not yet been developed. This approach also recognizes that.
changing messages by any means can be distracting to the driving public.
Signs are a form of "speech" protected by federal and state constitutions. As a result,
cities must be very careful that sign regulations generally do not discriminate on the
basis of message content. It can be a challenge to defend an ordinance that draws fine
distinctions when allowing certain kinds of signs to be dynamic while prohibiting others.
Accordingly, the dynamic sign provisions will "overlay" the city's existing sign
regulations. There would be no change to the existing standards regarding such things
as zoning, number, size, and location. As a general matter, the dynamic regulations
would apply equally to all signs, with few distinctions between zoning districts or
between on- and off-premise signs.
Although residential districts are deserving of more protection than other zoning
districts, that is taken into account in the underlying regulations. Additionally, there are
Meeting of June 25, 2007
Subject: Dynamic Signs Ordinance
Page 2
uses in residential districts that could benefit from having changing messages, such as
churches, schools and government offices. The ordinance allows dynamic signs for
conditionally permitted uses in residential districts and for all uses in other districts.
Through controls the potential impacts can be addressed by appropriate restrictions,
which are discussed below.
The ordinance does not include any spacing requirements. Spacing restrictions could
result in unequal treatment of property owners, since the first property owner to install a
dynamic sign could prevent the neighboring property owner from also having a dynamic
sign. This would be unfair, and could actually increase the frequency of such uses by
creating an incentive for nearby property owners to race each other to convert their
signs.
. The only location requirement is that dynamic messages are limited to pylon and
monument signs. Dynamic messages would not be permitted on building signs.
Operational Mode
Dynamic signs have the capability of operating in many different modes, ranging from
static messages to scrolling text to full motion video. These operational modes have
obvious implications for the distracting nature of dynamic signs.
The city's consultants concluded that there can never be definitive proof of a causal
connection between dynamic signs and highway accidents. This is because state-of-
the-art driving simulators cannot truly simulate real-life conditions. Further, controlled
roadway studies cannot be performed, because controlled roadways can not be filled
with hundreds or thousands of cars operating under normal conditions. Finally, eye
movement studies use a very limited pool of test subjects who are operating under
circumstances that are designed to avoid accidents.
Nevertheless, the studies performed to date provide important insight. For example,
some studies indicate how drivers tend to react to signs in different settings, while other
studies inform how different degrees and types of distraction are associated with
accidents. By considering those individual pieces together, the city can thoughtfully
evaluate the risks posed by dynamic signage.
Studies do show that there is a correlation between moving signs and the distraction of
highway drivers. An eye movement study showed that changing signs may distract
drivers by as much as two seconds. The Federal Highway Administration has
determined that being distracted for two seconds or more can result in traffic accidents.
Drivers can be distracted not only by a changing message, but also by knowing that the
sign has a changing message. Drivers may watch a sign waiting for the next change to
occur. Drivers are also distracted by messages that do not tell the full story in one look.
Meeting of June 25, 2007
Subject: Dynamic Signs Ordinance
Page 3
An example is a scrolling sign - people have a natural desire to see the end of the story,
and will continue to look at the sign in order to wait for the end.
The consultants also concluded that drivers are more distracted by special effects used
to change the message, such as fade-ins and fade-outs. Finally, drivers are generally
more distracted by messages that are too small to be clearly seen or that contain more
than a simple message.
In response to these conclusions, the ordinance allows only static displays. No
animation, motion or video would be permitted. Additionally, the message change would
have to be instantaneous, without any distracting effects, such as dissolving, spinning or
fading. Sequ!lntial messages, such as a two-stage message for a single product,
service or business, would also be prohibited. This would apply whether the sequential
. messageS' are on the same sign or multiple signs.
The ordinance also requires a minimum font size to avoid messages that are too small
to easily read or that contain too much information. The required minimum is seven
inches on a road with a speed limit between 25 and 34 miles per hour, nine inches on a
road with a speed limit of 35 to 44 miles per hour, 12 inches on a road with a speed limit
of 45 to 54 miles per hour, and 15 inches on a road with a speed limit of 55 miles per
hour or more. These are the recommended heights given in Issue 51 (2007) of Signline,
a publication of the International Sign Association. As an example, the city's
changeable message sign has a font size of slightly less than 10 inches for a three-line
message and 12 inches for a two-line message:
Slightly
less than
10 inch
font size
3'.6"
Meeting of June 25, 2007
Subject: Dynamic Signs Ordinance
Page 4
The ordinance provides that if the allowed portion of the sign is too small to meet this
minimum size, then no dynamic display is allowed.
Size of Dynamic Portion
One objective of dynamic sign regulation is the prevention of
driver distraction. Public safety is also protected by ensuring that
people can find their way to where they want to go. If "way-
finding" is compromised, driving conduct can be adversely
affected by last-second lane changes or turns, which could
result in traffic accidents.
A significant portion of permitted signs should remain constant,
. so that identify and location can be more readily determined.
This way-finding purpose should be given significantly more
weight than any advertising purpose of a dynamic message.
Limiting the amount of sign face that can be dynamic also
serves aesthetic and public safety purposes by discouraging the
proliferation of multiple changing signs and reducing exposure
to the public.
Staff recommended at the study session that no more than 35
percent of the message area of a permitted sign could contain a
dynamic message. This favors way-finding over advertising by a
2:1 factor. There was some concern expressed that this would
not be enough room in all situations.
The following show some existing signs in the city:
80 sqft Pylon Sign
35% Dynamic
Meeting of June 25, 2007
Subject: Dynamic Signs Ordinance
Page 5
The proposed ordinance continues to include the 35 percent maximum because this
provides a reasonable amount of space for the new technology while giving a 2:1
preference to the primary objective of providing a permanent message that allows
property owners to identify their locations and citizens to find intended destinations.
The ordinance also provides that the remainder of the sign cannot have dynamic
capabilities even though not used. This is needed to ensure compliance. It also provides
that there can be only one dynamic display on a sign.
Minimum Display Time
Because there is no ban on dynamic signs and no spacing requirements, the minimum
display time becomes critical. If the display time is too short, a driver could be subjected
to a view that appears to have constant movement. This impact would obviously be
compounded in a corridor with multiple signs.
Meeting of June 25, 2007
Subject: Dynamic Signs Ordinance
Page 6
If dynamic signs become pervasive and there are no meaningful limitations on each
sign's ability to change frequently, drivers may be subjected to an unsafe degree of
distraction and sensory overload. Accordingly, a longer display time is appropriate.
The ordinance establishes a minimum display time of 20 minutes, which is the standard
adopted by the city of Bloomington following its own thorough study. This is less than
the one-hour display time that is currently in effect through the district court's temporary
injunction, and thus provides greater flexibility to sign owners. There would be an
exception for time and temperature signs, which the federal court has recognized as a
legitimate exception to limitations on variable message signs. The ordinance provides
that a display of time, date, or temperature must remain for at least 20 minutes before
changing to a different display, but the time, date, or temperature information itself may
. change no mpre often than once every three seconds.
The ordinance provides that each sign must be designed to freeze the device in one
position if a malfunction occurs. The displays must also be equipped with a means to
immediately discontinue the display if it malfunctions, and the sign owner must
immediately stop the dynamic display when notified by the city that it is not complying
with the standards of this ordinance.
Brightness Levels
The consultants determined that the brightness of signs can be distracting, and if very
bright, can actually result in a "blinding" effect, particularly at night. Pure white light
appears the brightest, and has the most blinding capability.
Unfortunately, there is currently no good way to measure the brightness of signs in the
field. Sign manufacturers can measure the light emitted by LED signs in a controlled
factory setting by measuring the "nit" level, but those conditions cannot be re-created in
actual field conditions. Additionally, the instruments used to measure brightness are
currently very expensive.
With no good way of measuring brightness, the ordinance incorporates the general
standard adopted by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation: "No [sign] may be
illuminated to a degree of brightness that is greater than necessary for adequate
visibility." The general philosophy is that dynamic signs should have the same
appearance as regular signs both during the day and at night. Additionally, the
ordinance contains two other general standards found in Indiana and Ohio regulations,
which provide:
No sign may be of such intensity or brilliance as to impair the vision of a motor
vehicle driver with average eyesight or to otherwise interfere with the driver's
operation of a motor vehicle.
Meeting of June 25, 2007
Subject: Dynamic Signs Ordinance
Page 7
No sign may be of such intensity or brilliance that it interferes with the
effectiveness of an official traffic sign, device or signal.
The ordinance includes a process that allows city staff to make the initial determination,
but allows a sign owner to appeal this determination to an independent panel. The
appeal panel would consist of one person selected by the city, one person selected by
the sign owner, and one person selected by the first two people. This approach was
discussed at a meeting with sign industry representatives and appears to be generally
acceptable.
The ordinance currently does not prohibit the use of pure white light, but staff is hopeful
that industry representatives will help staff define that term.
Application to Existing Signs
The ordinance provides that existing dynamic displays must comply with the operational
standards. An existing dynamic display that does not meet the percent of sign face
requirement may continue as a non-conforming development. An existing dynamic
display that cannot meet the 10 inch minimum size requirement must use the largest
size possible for one line of copy to fit in the available space.
Incentives
The ordinance also includes incentives to encourage the removal of non-conforming
outdoor advertising signs. The advent of dynamic technology creates an important
community planning opportunity. A single dynamic sign can serve the function otherwise
performed by multiple traditional billboards. Thus, outdoor advertising companies ought
to be encouraged to use dynamic sign displays to consolidate such activities in
appropriate locations while removing traditional billboards from areas where large signs
are not appropriate.
The city of Minnetonka previously made a determination that off-premise signs are no
longer allowed in the city because they are inherently distracting and do not serve the
need of property owners to identify themselves and their businesses. Those signs
remain now as non-conforming uses. State and federal laws severely limit the city's
ability to require the removal of those signs.
The ordinance allows an off-premises sign to use 100 percent of the message area for
dynamic messages and an eight-second message display time if the owner removes
two other off-premise signs and commits to keep another sign without dynamic displays,
subject to certain minimum size and other conditions. This trade would offset the
distraction of a larger message area by removing the inherent distraction from another
sign and would reduce the number of non-conforming signs in the city. Because outdoor
advertising signs do not have the need for on-premises identification and also will not
proliferate since they are not allowed, this approach appears appropriate.
Meeting of June 25, 2007
Subject: Dynamic Signs Ordinance
Page 8
Public Comments
At the writing of this report, the city had received comments about the proposed
ordinance from Clear Channel Outdoor and from Roger Brown of Daktronics (see pages
A55-56), a manufacturer of dynamic signs. The following summarizes Clear Channel's
comments and staff's responses:
1. It is inappropriate to say that outdoor advertising signs are distracting when the
city's own consultants have concluded that there can never be definitive proof of
a causal connection between dynamic signs and highway accidents.
Response: This comment does not recognize that there are two different
concepts. No single study has conclusively proven that a particular dynamic
display caused particular traffic accidents that otherwise would not have
occurred. Because of the number of variables involved and the impossibility of
recreating all of them in a laboratory-type setting, that level of proof is impossible.
However, studies performed thus far provide more than sufficient support for the
city to conclude that outdoor advertising signs are, in fact, distracting to drivers,
and that distractions can lead to traffic accidents.
2. The company usually occupies property as a tenant, and it may not have the
authority to excavate to remove foundations.
Response: The city requires that foundations be removed as part of all other
demolition permits. This is done to protect public safety (from tripping over them)
and to avoid problems in the future.
3. The surrender of the state permit should be required upon removal of the sign,
not upon issuance of the enhanced dynamic display permit.
Response: This makes sense, and the change has been made in the
ordinance. An additional sentence is added that provides that the enhanced
dynamic display cannot begin to operate until proof is provided that the state
permit has been surrendered.
4. An enhanced dynamic display permit requires the sign company to commit to
never put a dynamic display on another existing sign. What happens if that
existing sign is subsequently removed?
Response: Subsequent events do not affect the permit. The permit is judged
by the circumstances existing at the time the permit is issued. Language was
added to the ordinance to clarify this.
Meeting of June 25, 2007
Subject: Dynamic Signs Ordinance
Page 9
5. The brightness standard of "adequate visibility" may be interpreted to mean a
bare minimum when in fact a sign that is too dim may also be distracting because
people strain to read it.
Response: In an attempt to avoid this unintended interpretation, staff has
added two words requested by the company: "No sign may be brighter than is
necessary for clear and adequate visibility."
The following summarizes Mr. Brown's comments and staff's responses:
1. Signs are expensive and it is unlikely that there will be many area with multiple
dynamic signs.
-
Response: As technology advances, these signs will become less and less
expensive, just like home computers. This trend has already begun. As
Daktronics said last year in its 10-Q filing with the Securities and Exchange
Commission, its revenues on the sales of its digital displays to outdoor
advertising companies has increased in part because of the lower cost of
displays.
2. There is no reason to give off-premises signs a shorter duration time than on-
premise signs. Logically the opposite is true because off-premises signs are
usually larger.
Response: As a general rule, the ordinance is not making any distinction
between off- and on-premise signs. However, the ordinance provides a shorter
duration as an incentive to eliminate billboards on nearly a 2 to 1 basis and to
prohibit dynamic displays on an additional billboard. The city is getting significant
public safety enhancements in return for these concessions from the off-premise
sign owner. On-premise sign owners are in no position to offer the City the same
benefits for that privilege.
3. On-premise signs are smaller and may need multiple frames to communicate
most messages.
Response: Studies show that drawn-out messages (such as sequential
messages) are more distracting than unrelated messages, and the ordinance will
not allow them. There is still a reasonable opportunity to provide a concise
message.
4. The percent of the sign face and a minimum font size unrelated to distance will
make the ability to communicate a message with one frame virtually negligible.
Response: Photos in the staff report show examples of existing signs that meet
the percent and font size requirements. The font sizes incorporated into the
Meeting of June 25, 2007
Subject: Dynamic Signs Ordinance
Page 1 0
ordinance are recommendations directly from the International Sign Association,
whose motto is "supporting, improving, and promoting the sign industry."
5. An exception for time and temperature signs is not legal because it is based on
content. City staff has misread the law.
Response: The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals specifically allowed an exception
for time and temperature signs in La Tour v. City of Fayetteville, 442 F.3d. 1094,
1097 (8th Cir. 2006): "We agree with the district court that, because a message
displaying the time and/or temperature is short and rudimentary, such a message
poses less of a traffic hazard than other messages. In light of all of these
reasol1s, we find the Ordinance to be content-neutral."
6. It is not valid to adopt the 20-minute hold time simply because another city did
the same thing.
Response: The reasons for the 20-minute duration time are explained. The fact
that another city chose the same period after its own thorough study is support,
but not the sole reason, for the result.
7. The Small Business Administration (SBA) has found that sales increase with the
use of dynamic signs.
Response: Even if this is correct, it is not persuasive. Unlike the city, the SBA's
goals are marketing and sales, not public safety.
8. A one-second duration is appropriate for an on-premise sign. Animations and
video should be allowed in appropriate areas.
Response: These suggestions are contrary to the findings of the legitimate.
safety studies.
8. Requiring the name of the business on the sign is also a prohibited content-
based regulation.
Response: The ordinance does not require the name of the business on the
sign. The ordinance requires only that a permanent message be on the sign,
which we presume will be some kind of an identifying message that will increase
the likelihood that citizens can find a destination. The sign owner is free to decide
what that message is.
9. The reference to the potential for distraction is not an appropriate basis for
regulation. Other things can also be distractions. The studies have found no
safety hazard.
Response: The legitimate studies have found a correlation between dynamic
signs and distractions. Those studies have also identified that distractions can
Meeting of June 25, 2007
Subject: Dynamic Signs Ordinance
Page 11
result in accidents. That is enough to justify regulation. Other things may also
cause distractions, but the city has no control over them. Moreover, the Supreme
Court has repeatedly emphasized that governments need not choose between
attacking all facets of a problem (or none at all). The city has the ability to
regulate where it can to minimize the amount of driver distractions.
11. An "S second hold time is appropriate and in line with Federal and State safety
studies."
Response: Since December the city, its consultants, and its counsel have been
gathering studies that inform the regulation of dynamic signs. Because Mr.
Brown's assertion was not borne out by the State and Federal studies that had
been collected thus far, we requested Mr. Brown to provide those studies to us.
Wh'at ne provided to us, while voluminous, did not include any Federal and State
safety studies that show that an eight-second hold time is appropriate.
+:+ He referenced a 19S0 safety study and a 2001 research review
performed by or for the Federal Highway Administration. While those
documents note that the data was not conclusive when those reports
were issued and that there would be value in further research, they
provide far more support for the City's position than for Mr. Brown's
position (that "there was no correlation between the usage of the signs
and traffic safety."). That is why the city (and, in turn, Judge
Zimmerman in District Court) relied on each of those documents in the
pending civil action, where the court allowed a substantially longer
"hold time" (of one hour) than would be allowed under the proposed
amendments.
+:+ He has also provided two links to web pages on the site of the Small
Business Administration, the contents of which he describes as "that
organization's findings regarding EMC safety concerns." These do not
appear to be the "findings" of any agency, let alone of an agency with
special expertise in traffic safety. The content on the SBA's web pages
appears to have been provided by "The Signage Foundation for
Communication Excellence, Inc.", an organization that is a joint
enterprise between sign industry organizations and the SBA. The
purpose of those pages, according to the Foundation's webpage, was
"to acquaint small business with the value of on-premise signage."
While the page regarding safety cites the 19S0 Wachtel and Netherton
study, the actual text of that study undermines the assertions on the
page, particularly when that study is viewed as a whole. The only
other study referenced by the Foundation on the page regarding
safety was written by a former FHWA official, Richard Schwab.
Further investigation shows that the Schwab report was done for the
Meeting of June 25, 2007
Subject: Dynamic Signs Ordinance
Page 12
Foundation itself and the International Sign Association (whose motto
is "supporting, improving, and promoting the sign industry.").
.:. The only state agency document that he provided was not the result of
a study in any ordinary sense of the term. It is the two-page MnDOT
internal technical memorandum that the plaintiff in the pending
litigation tried and failed to rely upon in seeking an order allowing it to
resume using a dynamic display with an eight-second interval. It
simply reflects the application of a formula for applying state billboard
spacing requirements in the context of digital displays. On pages 8-9
of his January ruling, Judge Zimmerman explained the very limited
significance of that document. Moreover, Scott Robinson of MnDOT
has explained to the city's consultants that the memo is not a MnlDOT
policy, statute or rule, but rather it was written to provide internal
guidance.
.:. Mr. Brown also provided two studies commissioned by the sign
industry itself. The first was a study performed for the Outdoor
Advertising Association's own foundation, The Foundation for Outdoor
Advertising Research and Education, by Suzanne Lee and others at
Virginia Tech entitled "Driving Performance in the Presence and
Absence of Billboards." The second was "An Examination of the
Relationship Between Signs and Traffic Safety," performed by a
private consulting firm for the foundation of the United States Sign
Council. Neither study focused on digital displays or the special issues
that digital displays present. Moreover, the Lee study has been
subjected to an extraordinary level of judicial criticism. When rejecting
the Lee study's conclusions regarding the supposed absence of a
relationship between billboards and traffic safety, a federal judge
found that the Lee study "is so infected by industry bias as to lack
credibility and reliability." Nichols Media v. Town of Babylon, 365
F.Supp.2d 295, 308 (N.D.N.Y. 2005). Following a full trial in which Ms.
Lee was cross-examined regarding the report, the court held that "this
conclusion is supported not only by industry involvement in the design
and execution of the study but also by the lack of peer review and the
fact that there is no other scientific study with the same or similar
conclusions regarding driver distraction." Id. Even if the information in
the Tantala Group report were more relevant to digital displays, its
genesis has much in common with the Lee study. According to the
website of the United States Sign Council "if you're in the sign
business, USSC is for you. . . . USSC is managed by sign people for
the benefit of sign people."
.:. Mr. Brown's email also includes a quotation from a "Professor Taylor"
at Villanova University, in which he stated that "there appears to be no
Meeting of June 25, 2007
Subject: Dynamic Signs Ordinance
Page 13
reason to believe that changeable message signs represent a safety
hazard." Villanova Professor Charles R. Taylor is a Professor of
Marketing. His Villanova web biography states that his nonacademic
positions include "consulting" for Clear Channel and Eller Media (Clear
Channel Outdoor's predecessor), as well as for outdoor advertising
company Magic Media. An expert whose expertise is not traffic safety
is not qualified to opine on the subject of traffic safety.
Planning Commission Recommendation
On June 14, 2007, the planning commission recommended that the city council adopt
the ordinance with modifications. (See the minutes on pages AA57-A65.) During discussion
, by the commission, it was noted several areas required further consideration:
. Minimum Display Time
The commission felt that there was a need for a definite hold time as to not impact the
traveling public; however, they suggested some consideration less than 20 minutes.
Staff believes that the hold time is an integral part of the ordinance for at least two
reasons. First, from a safety standpoint, it is needed to decrease the tendency
(recognized by safety experts) of drivers and pedestrians to stare at signs that they
expect to change because, over time, a longer hold time will lower expectations that a
sign will change while they are watching it. Second, as dynamic displays become more
prevalent (as may occur with on-premise signs in the city), it will be more likely that
multiple uncoordinated dynamic displays will be in view at the same time. This will
cause one or more distracting changes to be visible every few seconds, thus
heightening the distraction. Conversely, the more time between transitions, the less
likely multiple signs will cause distraction.
. Maximum Dynamic Portion of Sign
The planning commission further recommended consideration of signage be allowed to
have an increased percentage of dynamic area. Staff has recommended a 35%
maximum to address wayfinding issues, and secondarily as an aesthetic consideration
as it relates to current city characteristics. If the dynamic portion would be allowed to be
50% or above, staff notes the following points of consideration:
Dynamic VB. Wayfinding - An important reason why permits can be issued for
on-premise commercial signs (but not off-premise commercial signs) is that, in their
customary use, on-premise commercial signs tend to provide a means of finding a
location. If the ordinance is changed in a way that makes it relatively easy to
temporarily replace the full message of an on-premise sign with another message that
wayfinding function would likely be undermined. On-premise signs would more
frequently be used for purposes unrelated to wayfinding and more closely related to the
purpose of signs no longer permitted in the city (except as grandfathered uses).
Meeting of June 25, 2007
Subject: Dynamic Signs Ordinance
Page 14
However, the sign owner's interest in using its sign for more than wayfinding can often
be accommodated. Staff would submit that the dynamic portion of signage should not
be outweighed or equal to the wayfinding purpose of signage.
Effects on neighborhood character-In considering these issues, it is important
to remember that the proposed amendments would not forbid the placement of dynamic
signage in residential districts, and that residential districts are often the home to certain
types of conditional uses (such as religious institutions and schools) that are more likely
to use dynamic signage, The city must consider effects of signage in areas near
neighborhoods or within neighborhoods. Signs in a more urban or densely populated
environment, near or visible to existing housing, is a concern. Signs used for
conditionally permitted uses, such as religious or educational institutions, could have a
. direct effe~tqn residential properties. If the dynamic portion of the sign were only one-
third of the sign; there is less likelihood for conflicts between land uses.
Corridors of Dynamic Signage - Corridors of dynamic signage must be
considered. Whether the sign is located on 1-394 or State Highway 7; the potential for a
proliferation of dynamic signs is an aesthetic concern. An often cited city goal is to
protect the natural environment; staff believes that more dynamic signage allowance is
contrary to that goal.
. Clarify "Permanent" portion of the Sign
The planning commission requested that staff review the dynamic portion language to
ensure we have properly defined the portion of the sign that would be considered
"permanent." Staff has reviewed the definition of dynamic and finds that the definition is
complete in describing the aspects of signage that areat issue. The other portion of the
sign, the remaining 65%, may not have dynamic qualities.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends continuing the 20 minute hold time and a 35% maximum dynamic
sign face. Staff believes that this ordinance constitutes a major change in sign
regulation in Minnetonka, which far exceeds the allowances within the current city code.
Only dynamic time, temperature, and events are currently allowed by the code. The
approach that staff has presented will allow the city to monitor and experience the use
of dynamic signage. At a future point, if there is a need to adjust the allowances, the city
will have relatable, visual knowledge of the kind of effect this signage produces. Staff
further recommends the city council adopt the ordinance found on pages A43-A54.
Submitted through:
John Gunyou, City Manager
Originated by:
Desyl Peterson, City Attorney
Meeting of June 25, 2007
Subject: Dynamic Signs Ordinance
Page 15
Ron Rankin, Community Development Director
Julie Wischnack, AICP City Planner
G:\WORDlCC Items 2007\2007 CC Word Staff Reports\cl97054 Oynamic Signs.07a.DOC
ORDINANCE NO. 2007-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 300.30
REGARDING DYNAMIC SIGNS
The City of Minnetonka Ordains:
Section 1. City code 3300.30, subd. 1 is amended as follows:
1. Purpose and Findings.
The purpose and findings of the sign ordinance are as follows:
. a) Purpose: the sign ordinance is intended to establish a comprehensive and
balanced system of sign control that accommodates the need for a well-maintained,
safe, and attractive community, and the need for effective communications including
business identification. 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 by
authorizing:
1) permanent signs which establish a high standard of aesthetics;
2) signs which are compatible with their surroundings;
3) signs which are designed, constructed, installed and maintained in a
manner that does not adversely impact public safety or unduly distract motorists;
4) signs which are large enough to convey the intended message and to help
citizens find their wav to intended destinations;
5) signs that are proportioned to the scale of, and are architecturally
compatible with, principal structures;
6) permanent signs which give preference to the on-premise owner or
occupant; and
7) temporary commercial signs and advertising displays which provide an
opportunity for grand openings 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 Minnetonka 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
The stricken language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
A43 Dynamic Signage Ordinance
Ordinance No. 2007-
Page 2
finds:
1) permanent and temporary signs have a direct impact on and 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 viable identification of community businesses and
institutions must be established;
4r, - ,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 growth;
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;
8) commercial signs are generally incompatible with residential uses and
should be strictly limited in residential zoning districts; and
9) the right to express noncommercial opinions in any zoning district must be
protected, subject to reasonable restrictions on size, height, location and number.
Section 2. City code ~300.02, subd. 2, is amended by the deletion of the following
definitions and the re-numbering of the remaining clauses consecutively.
"Message centor/time and temperature display" a sign h(lving eloctrically changing
co flY which disfllays current time, temperature, and/or flublic service
announcements.
"Public service announcemenf' any sign disfllay intended flrimarily to flromote
The stricken language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
A44 Dynamic Signage Ordinance
Ordinance No. 2007-
Page 3
items of general iRterest to tile commHnity such as time, temperatHre, date,
atmospl1eric conditions, Do'!: JORes indHstrial average, Rews, etc. This does Rot
inclHde any information v:l1icl1 wOHld I:>e related to commercial prodHcts or services
located at the display site.
"Readerl:>oard sign" any sign haviRg a message not permaReRtly affixed to tile sign
face and the copy is man Hally chaRged.
Section 3. City code ~300.30, subd. 2, is amended by the addition of the following
definition which is to be inserted alphabetically and the following clauses renumbered
consecutively:
"Dynamic display" -any characteristics of a sian that appear to have movement
or that appear to chanae. caused bv anv method other than phvsicallv removina
and replacina the sian or its components. whether the apparent movement or
chanae is in the displav. the sian structure itself. or anv other component of the
sian. This includes a displav that incorporates a technoloay or method allowina
the sian face to chanae the imaae without havina to phvsicallv or mechanicallv
replace the sian face or its components. This also includes anv rotatina.
revolvina. movina. flashina. blinkina. or animated displav and any displav that
incorporates rotatina panels, LED Iiahts manipulated throuah diaital input. "diaital
ink" or anv other method or technoloav that allows the sian face to present a
series of imaaes or displavs.
Section 4. City code ~300.30, subd 4(a) is amended as follows:
a) Monument identification signs:
1) one sign per development;
2) maximum copy and graphic area as follows:
width of adjacent
right-of-way
less than 100 feet
copy and graphic
area
100 feet or greater
36 square feet
50 square feet
3) maximum monument area is two times the potential copy and graphic
area;
The stricken language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
A45 Dynamic Signage Ordinance
Ordinance No. 2007-
Page 4
4) copy and graphic display limited to three items of information; (Figure 30-
16)
Figure 30-16
5) 15 foot maximum height; and
6) signs which are not internally illuminated shall have light fixtures and
sources screened from viewi--CIfIG
7)' message centers/time and temperature displays permitted but the
maximum ar.ea for display is 50 percent of the potential copy and graphic area of the
monument identification sign.
Section 5. City Code ~300.30, subd. 10 is amended as follows:
10. Prohibited Signs.
The following types of signs are expressly prohibited in all districts:
a) roof signs including signs mounted on a roof surface or projecting above the roof
line of a structure if either attached to the structure or cantilevered over the structure;
0) revolving and moving signs except electronic message centor/time and
temperature display signs according to suodivision 4 and search lights according to
subdivision 8;
sl;!). flashing, blinking or animated signs including out not limited to tra':elinglights or
any other means not providing constant illumination except electronic message
center/time and temperature display signs according to subdivision 4 and search lights
accon:ling to suodivision llsions with dvnamic displavs except search liohts under
subdivision 8 and those allowed under subdivision 14;
Gf) portable signs, except temporary signs that are specifically permitted in section
300.30;
sf!) projecting signs. Wall signs shall be mounted parallel to the building and shall
not project more than 18 inches from the face of the building;
fg) painted wall signs including signs painted on the face of a structure. Works of art
The stricken language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
A46 Dynamic Signage Ordinance
Ordinance No. 2007-
Page 5
which are not commercial messages are exempt;
9'f) signs attached to trees and utility poles;
fig) signs within public right-of-way except for official traffic signs and those specified
in subparagraph 9(k) and (I);
ib.) signs which are designed to resemble official traffic signs except signs which are
used to control traffic on private property;
H) abandoned signs or signs other than outdoor advertising structures that advertise
. an activity; bvsiness, product or service no longer available on the premises on which
the sign is located;
kl) signs attached to fences except athletic field fence panels according to
subdivision 1;
Ik) illuminated signs which exhibit any of the following:
1) external illumination that is determined to interfere with safe traffic
operations;
2) the sign is directly oriented to any residential district;--ef
3) illumination of a commercial sian in a residential district. except a sian
used for a conditionallv permitted use: or
4)
subd. 2.
the level of illumination exceed standards specified in section 300.28,
mD signs that obstruct the vision of pedestrians, cyclists, or motorists traveling on or
entering public streets;
flm) exterior signs that obstruct any window, door, fire escape, stairway or opening
intended to provide light, air, ingress or egress for any structure;
Gn) signs that are in violation of the building code or the electrical code adopted by
the city;
j:}Q) blank signs;
€IQ) merchandise boxes or signs not affixed to a principal structure excluding signs
The strioken language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
A47 Dynamic Signage Ordinance
Ordinance No. 2007-
Page 6
permitted in subdivision B(d);
fg) outdoor advertising signs are not permitted in any zoning district, except that the
provisions of this paragraph do not apply to temporary outdoor advertising signs
permitted under Subd. 9 (k) above. Outdoor advertising signs which exist on the
effective date of this section shall be considered as nonconforming signs and are
subject to standards contained in section 300.29. An outdoor advertising sign is a
principal use of property. No permitted or conditionally permitted use or any part of such
use may be located on the same parcel of property as such a sign. The parcel on which
such a sign is located may not be subdivided to segregate the sign from the remaining
propertY.Ioi'the purposes of this paragraph, "parcel of property" means any property
for which one property identification number has been issued by the county, or all
contiguous property in common ownership as of October 15, 1997, whichever is
greater; and
sr) any sign not expressly permitted by the provisions in section 300.30.
Section 6. City code 3300.30 is amended by the addition of a new subdivision 14 to
read as follows:
14. Dvnamic Displavs.
a) Findinas. Studies show that there is a correlation between dvnamic displays on
sians and the distraction of hiahwav drivers. Distraction can lead to traffic accidents.
Drivers can be distracted not onlv bv a chanaina messaae. but also bv knowina that the
sian has a chanaina messaae. Drivers mav watch a sian waitina for the next chanae to
occur. Drivers are also distracted bv messaaes that do not tell the full stOry in one look.
People have a natural desire to see the end of the stOry and will continue to look at the
sian in order to wait for the end. Additionallv. drivers are more distracted bv special
effects used to chanae the messaae, such as fade-ins and fade-outs. Finallv. drivers
are aenerallv more distracted by messaaes that are too small to be clearlv seen or that
contain more than a simple messaae. Time and temperature sians appear to be an
exception to these concerns because the messaaes are short. easilv absorbed, and
become inaccurate without freauent chanaes.
Despite these public safetv concerns. there is merit to allowina new technoloaies
to easily update messaaes. Except as prohibited bv state or federal law, sian owners
should have the opportunity to use these technoloaies with certain restrictions. The
restrictions are intended to minimize potential driver distraction and to minimize
proliferation in residential districts where siQns can adverselv impact residential
character.
The etrickcn language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
A48 Dynamic Signage Ordinance
Ordinance No. 2007-
Page 7
Local spacinq requirements could interfere with the equal opportunitv to use such
technoloqies and are not included. Without those requirements, however, there is the
potential for numerous dvnamic displavs to exist alonq anv roadwav. if more than one
dvnamic displav can be seen from a qiven location on a road. the minimum displav time
becomes critical. If the displav time is too short, a driver could be subiected to a view
that appears to have constant movement. This impact would obviouslv be compounded
in a corridor with multiple siqns. If dvnamic displavs become pervasive and there are no
meaninqfullimitations on each siqn's ability to chanqe frequentlv, drivers mav be
subiected to an unsafe deqree of distraction and sensory overload. Therefore, a lonqer
displav time is appropriate.
A constant messaqe is tvpicallv needed on a siqn so that the public can use it to
identify and find an intended destination. Chanqinq messaqes detract from this wav-
findinq purpose and could adverselv affect drivinq conduct throuqh last-second lane
chanqes, stops, or turns. which could result in traffic accidents. Accordinqlv, dvnamic
displavs qenerallv should not be allowed to occupv the entire copv and qraphic area of
a siqn.
In conclusion, the citv finds that dvnamic displavs should be allowed on siqns but
with siqnificant controls to minimize their proliferation and their potential threats to public
safety .
b) ReQulations. Dvnamic displavs on siqns are allowed subiect to the followinq
conditions:
1) Dvnamic displavs are allowed onlv on monument and pvlon siqns for
conditionallv permitted uses in residential districts and for all uses in other districts. .
Dvnamic displavs mav occUPV no more than 35 percent of the actual copv and qraphic
area. The remainder of the siqn must not have the capability to have dvnamic displavs
even if not used. Onlv one. contiquous dvnamic displav area is allowed on a siqn face:
2) A dvnamic displav mav not chanqe or move more often than once every
20 minutes, except one for which chanqes are necessary to correct hour-and-minute.
date, or temperature information. Time. date. or temperature information is considered
one dvnamic displav and mav not be included as a component of anv other dvnamic
displav. A displav of time. date. or temperature must remain for at least 20 minutes
before chanqinq to a different displav, but the time, date, or temperature information
itself mav chanqe no more often than once every three seconds;
3) The imaqes and messaqes displaved must be static. and the transition
The stricken language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
A49 Dynamic Signage Ordinance
Ordinance No. 2007-
Page 8
from one static displav to another must be instantaneous without anv special effects:
4) The imaQes and messaQes displaved must be complete in themselves,
without continuation in content to the next imaQe or messaQe or to anv other siQn:
5) Every line of COpy and qraphics in a dynamic displav must be at least
seven inches in heiQht on a road with a speed limit of 25 to 34 miles per hour. nine
inches on a road with a speed limit of 35 to 44 miles per hour. 12 inches on a road with
a speed limit of 45 to 54 miles per hour. and 15 inches on a road with a speed limit of 55
miles per hour or more. If there is insufficient room for copv and Qraphics of this size in
. the area ?lIdWed under clause 1 above. then no dvnamic displav is allowed;
6) Dvnamic displavs must be desiQned and equipped to freeze the device in
one position if a malfunction occurs. The displavs must also be equipped with a means
to immediatelv discontinue the displav if it malfunctions. and the siQn owner must
immediatelv stop the dvnamic displav when notified bv the citv that it is not complvinQ
with the standards of this ordinance:
7) Dvnamic displavs must complv with the briQhtness standards contained in
subdivision 15:
8) Dvnamic displavs existinQ on (insert the effective date of this ordinance)
must complv with the operational standards listed above. An existinQ dvnamic displav
that does not meet the structural requirements in clause 1 mav continue as a non-
conforminQ development subiect to section 300.29. An existinQ dvnamic displav that
cannot meet the minimum size requirement in clause 5 must use the larQest size
possible for one line of copv to fit in the available space.
c) Incentives. Outdoor advertisinQ siQns do not need to serve the same wav-
findinQ function as do on-premises siQns. Further. outdoor advertisinQ siQns are no
10nQer allowed in the city, and there is no potential that they will proliferate. Finallv,
outdoor advertisinQ siQns are in themselves distractinQ and their removal serves public
safety. The city is extremelv limited in its abilitv to cause the removal of those siQns.
This clause is intended to provide incentives for the voluntary and uncompensated
removal of outdoor advertisinq siQns in certain settinQs. This removal results in an
overall advancement of one or more of the Qoals set forth in this section that should
more than offset anv additional burden caused bv the incentives. These provisions are
also based on the recoQnition that the incentives create an opportunitv to consolidate
outdoor advertisinq services that would otherwise remain distributed throuQhout the
community.
The stricken language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
A50 Dynamic Signage Ordinance
Ordinance No. 2007-
Page 9
1) A person mav obtain a permit for an enhanced dvnamic displav on one
face of an outdoor advertisinQ siQn if the followinQ requirements are met:
(a) The applicant aQrees in writinQ to permanentlv remove. within 15
davs after issuance of the permit. at least two other faces of an outdoor advertisinQ siQn
in the citv that are owned or leased bv the applicant. each of which must satisfy the
criteria of parts (b) throuQh (d) of this subsection. This removal must include the
complete removal of the structure and foundation supportinQ each siQn face. The
applicant must aQree that the citv mav remove the siQn if the applicant does not timelv
do so. and the application must be accompanied bv a cash deposit or letter of credit
acceptable to the citv attornev sufficient to pav the citv's costs for that removal. The
. applicant must also aQree that it is removinQ the siQn voluntarilv and that it has no riQht
to compensation for the removed siQn under anv law.
(b) The citv has not previouslv issued an enhanced dvnamic displav
permit based on the removal of the particular faces relied upon in this permit
application.
(c) Each removed siQn has a copv and Qraphic area of at least 288
square feet and satisfies two or more of the followinQ additional criteria:
(1) The removed siQn is located adiacent to a hiQhwav with
more than two reQular lanes and with a general speed limit of 45 miles per hour or
greater, but that does not have restrictions on access equivalent to those of an
interstate hiQhwav:
(2) All or a substantial portion of the structure for the removed
siQn was constructed before 1975 and has not been substantiallv improved;
(3) The removed siQn is located in a noncommercial zoninQ district:
(4) The removed siQn is located in a special planninQ area
designated in the 1999 comprehensive plan; or
(5) The removed copv and graphic area is equal to or or Qreater
than the area of the copv and Qraphic area for which the enhanced dvnamic displav
permit is SOUQht.
(d) If the removed siQn face is one for which a state permit is required
bv state law, the applicant must surrendered its permit to the state upon removal of the
sign. The sign that is the subiect of the enhanced dvnamic displav permit cannot beQin
The stricken language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
A51 Dynamic Signage Ordinance
Ordinance No. 2007-
Page 10
to operate until proof is provided to the citv that the state permit has been surrendered.
Ie) The applicant must aQree in writinQ that no dvnamic displavs will
ever be used on one additional outdoor advertisinQ siQn that has a copv and Qraphic
area of at least 288 square feet in size. This aQreement will be bindinQ on the applicant
and all future owners of the siQn. If the siQn is subseQuentlv removed or destroved and
not replaced, the holder of the enhanced dvnamic display permit is not required to
substitute a different siQn for the one that no 10nQer exists.
2) If the applicant complies with the permit requirements noted above. the
citv will issue an enhanced dynamic display permit for the desiQnated outdoor
advertisinQ siQn. This permit will allow a dvnamic displav to occUPV 100 percent of the
potential copv and Qraphic area and to chanQe no more frequently than once every
eiQht seconds. The desiQnated siQn must meet all other requirements of this ordinance.
Section 7. City code S300.30 is amended by the addition of a new subdivision 15 to
read as follows:
15. BriQhtness Standards.
a) All siQns must meet the followinQ briQhtness standards in addition to those in
subdivision 10:
1) No siQn mav be brighter than is necessary for clear and adequate visibilitv.
2) No siQn mav be of such intensity or brilliance as to impair the vision of a
motor vehicle driver with averaQe eyesiQht or to otherwise interfere with the driver's
operation of a motor vehicle.
3) No siQn mav be of such intensity or brilliance that it interferes with the
effectiveness of an official traffic siQn. device or siQnal.
b) The person owning or controlling the siQn must adiust the siQn to meet the
briQhtness standards in accordance with the citv's instructions. The adiustment must be
made immediatelv upon notice of non-compliance from the citv. The person owninQ or
controllinQ the siQn mav appeal the citv's determination throuQh the followinQ appeal
procedure:
1) After makinQ the adiustment required bv the city. the person owninQ or
controllinQ the siQn mav appeal the city's determination bv deliverinQ a written appeal to
the city clerk within 10 davs after the city's non-compliance notice. The written appeal
The stricken language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
A52 Dynamic Signage Ordinance
Ordinance No. 2007-
Page 11
must include the name of a person unrelated to the person and business makinQ the
appeal. who will serve on the appeal panel.
2) Within five business davs after receivinQ the appeal. the city must name a
person who is not an official or emplovee of the city to serve on the appeal panel. Within
five business days after the city names its representative, the city's representative must
contact the siQn owner's representative. and the two of them must appoint a third
member to the panel. who has no relationship to either party.
3) The appeal panel mav develop its own rules of procedure. but it must hold
a hearinQ wifhin five business days after the third member is appointed. The city and the
siQn owner must be Qiven the opportunitv to present testimonv, and the panel may hold
the hearinQ, or a portion of it. at the siQn location. The panel must issue its decision on
what level of briqhtness is needed to meet the briQhtness standards within five business
davs after the hearinQ commences. The decision will be bindinQ on both parties.
c) All siQns installed after (insert the effective date of this ordinance) that will have
illumination bv a means other than naturalliQht must be equipped with a mechanism
that automatically adjusts the briqhtness in response to ambient conditions. These siQns
must also be equipped with a means to immediately turn off the displav or liQhtinQ if it
malfunctions. and the siQn owner or operator must immediatelv turn off the siQn or
liqhtinQ when notified bv the city that it is not complyinq with the standards in this
section.
Section 8. A violation of this ordinance is subject to the penalties and provisions of
Chapter XIII of the city code.
Section 9. This ordinance is effective upon adoption.
Adopted by the city council of the City of Minnetonka, Minnesota, on June 25,2007.
Janis A. Callison, Mayor
ATTEST:
The stricken language is deleted; the underlined language is inserted.
A53 Dynamic Signage Ordinance
AAC\(.\1m,ot ~
ORDINANCE NO. 416 2ND SERIES
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA REGARDING EAGAN CITY
CODE CHAPTER ELEVEN ENTITLED "LAND USE REGULATIONS (ZONING)" BY
AMENDING SECTION 11.70, SUBD. 28 ENTITLED REGARDING PLACEMENT,
ERECTION AND MAINTENANCE OF SIGNS; AND BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE
EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 and 11.99.
The City Council of the City of Eagan does ordain:
Section 1. Eagan City Code Chapter 11 is hereby amended by revising Section 11.70,
Subd. 28, to read as follows:
Subd. 28. _ Placement, erection and maintenance of signs.
A. Purpose, construction and definitions.
I. Purpose. The purpose of this section shall be to regulate the placement, erection and
maintenance of signs in the city so as to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the
residents of the city.
2. Construction. All terms and words used in this section shall be given their
commonsense meaning considered in context, except as hereinafter specifically defined.
3. Definitions. The following terms, as used in this section, shall have the meanings
stated:
(a) Business sign means any sign upon which there is any name 01 designation
that has as its purpose business, professional or commercial identification and which is
related directly to the use of the premises upon which the sign is located.
(b) Freestanding ground sign means a business sign erected on freestanding
shafts, posts or walls which are solidly affixed to the ground and completely independent
of any building or other structure. Any business freestanding ground sign which projects
more than seven feet above ground level is considered a pylon sign.
(c) Governmental sign means any sign placed, erected or maintained by a
governmental entity or agency for identification of or directions to a public facility OI
street or fOI traffic control or general public services.
(d) Local street means a street within the city, which is not functionally
classified within the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan as a principal arterial, "A" minor
arterial, "B" minor arterial, major collector or minor collector.
(e) Nonbusiness sign means any sign such as a personal nameplate or
designation as for residences, churches, schools, hospitals, traffic or road signs, which do
not contain advertising and are directly related to the premises upon which they are
located.
(f) Off-premises sign means a sign which directs attention to a business,
commodity, service or entertainment conducted, sold or offered somewhere other than on
the property upon which the sign is located.
(g) Product sign means any sign upon which there is any brand name,
trademark, logo, distinctive symbol, designation or advertising which has as its purpose
the promotion of any business, product, goods, activity or service. Product signs shall be
subordinate to business signs.
(h) Public right-oj-way OI public rights-oj-way means the surface, air space
abQYefue surface and the area below the surface of any public street, highway, lane, path,
alley, sidewalk, trail, avenue, boulevard, drive, court, concourse, bridge, tunnel, park,
parkway, skyway, waterway, dock, bulkhead, wharf, pier, easement or similar property or
waters within the city owned by or under control of the city, or dedicated or otherwise
conveyed to the city for general public use.
(i) Pylon sign means a business sign erected on freestanding shafts, posts or
walls which are solidly affixed to the ground, and which projects more than seven feet
above ground \evel. Pylon signs, when authorized, are considered a conditional use, as
defined in the zoning chapter, and are subject to all conditions, regulations and fees
required for conditional uses.
(j) Sign means any surface, facing or object upon which there is printed, painted
or artistic matter, design or lighting.
(k) Sign area means the gross area, exclusive of supportive frame, which
contains copy or identifying features such as a logo, character or identifying figure.. The
gross area shall be calculated as an enclosed area bounded by no more than 12 straight
lines.
(I) Sign height means the distance from the lowermost ground point to which the
sign is attached, to the highest point on the sign.
(m) Trail means any paved surface within the public right-of-way, outside of the
paved street surface, used by pedestrians and cyclists.
B. Permitted uses.
I. Location oj business signs. Business signs are permitted on property zoned business,
industrial, agricultural, public facilities, RD OI PD only in conjunction with an approved
business, industrial OI agricultural use.
z,
2. Location oj business signs in residential areas. Business signs are permitted in
residentially zoned areas or areas of PD designation for residential use only under the following
cases:
(a) "For sale" or "for rent" signs, four feet by four feet or smaller, advertising the
premises upon which such sign is located.
(b) Real estate "for sale" signs, not over 100 square feet, of a land developer,
which are located upon the premises offered for sale.
(c) Area identification signs for major apartment complexes.
C. General Sign Standards.
1. 'Construction and erection oj signs. All signs shall be constructed and erected in a
good and workmanlike manner of sound and sufficient materials so as to ensure the safety of the
public and in accordance with all reasonable standards employed by professional signmakers.
2. Location on private property. No sign shall be erected, placed or located upon
private property without the permission of the property owner or the lessee.
3. Location to property line. No business sign shall be located nearer than ten feet from
any property or dividing line.
4. Location on public property. No sign, other than governmental signs, shall be placed
upon any city owned public property, or railroad right-of-way. No sign, other than governmental
signs, shall be affixed to any utility pole.
5. Moving parts, lights. No signs are allowed which contain moving sections or
intermittent or flashing lights, except for intermittent display of time and temper~ture,
governmental signs, and dynamic display signs allowed under subdivision K below.
6. Obstruction oj vision. No sign shall be erected or maintained in such place and
manner as obstructs driver vision or is noxious, annoying or hazardous because of method of
lighting, illumination, reflection or location.
7. Painted signs on buildings. No signs are allowed which are painted directly upon the
walls of a building.
8. Placement within public right-oj-way. No sign other than governmental signs, shall
be located within any city owned public right-of-way, except as follows:
(a) Residential name and address signs may be located within the public right-of-
way when such signs are attached to mail boxes, private lampposts or the like.
.:b
(b) Non-business signs may be placed in the public right-of-way of a local street
only if the sign is located more than ten feet from the back of the street curb where no
trail exists or more than 25 feet from the back of the curb where a trail exists.
9. Source of lighting. No signs are permitted for which the source of light is directly
visible to passing pedestrians or vehicle traffic.
D. Off-pIemises signs.
1. No off-premises sign shall be permitted in any zone within the city except as
permitted under this sub-paragraph.
2. The owner of an existing off-premises sign may construct a new off-premises sign
pursuant to a conditional use permit issued in accordance with the provisions of chapter 11 of the
. City Code, 'and under the following criteria:
(a) No sign will be permitted which increases the number of signs beyond the
number of signs depicted in table A (which follows this section), as amended from time
to time.
(b) No sign shall be permitted which increases the total square footage of all
signs beyond the number of total square feet depicted in table A (which follows this
section), as amended from time to time.
(c) No sign shall be permitted which increases the total number of sign surfaces
beyond the total number of sign surfaces depicted in table A (which follows this section),
as amended from time to time.
(d) The maximum square footage of a sign shall be 250 square feet; however, the
city may allow a sign in excess of 250 square feet upon (i) the reduction of the .total
number of signs, square footage or surface areas depicted in table A (which follows this
section), as amended from time to time, and (ii) amendment to said table A to reflect such
reduction, and (iii) further, so long as the total square footage of all signs is not increased
beyond the total of sign square footage depicted in said table A, at the time of application
for a new sign.
(e) No sign shall be located nearer to any other off-premises sign than 1,500
lineal feet on the same side of the street or 300 lineal feet on the opposite side of the
street.
(f) No sign shall be located on a platted lot which contains a business sign.
(g) No sign shall be located within 300 feet of any freestanding ground sign or
pylon sign.
(h) No sign shall be located within 200 feet of any residentially zoned district.
'"
(i) No sign or any part thereof shall exceed 40 feet in height as measured from
the land adjacent to the base of the sign.
3. Any new off-premise sign permitted under this paragraph, shall not be placed upon
any property upon which a building or structure already exists.
4. Any new off-premise sign permitted under this paragraph, above, shall be located
only on property zoned for business or industrial use.
5. Any off-premise sign now existing or permitted to be constructed shall be removed
prior to the city approving the platting of the property upon which the sign is located or prior to
the city issuing a building permit for the construction of a structure upon the property upon
. which the ~ign is located, whichever occurs earlier.
6. Any new off-premise sign pursuant to a conditional use permit issued hereunder shall
be subject to the provisions governing conditional use permits as set forth elsewhere in this
chapter.
E. Building-mounted, window/door and temporary business signs, standards.
I. Building signs on single-tenant buildings and end units in multi-tenant buildings. On
single-tenant buildings, no more than three total signs, distributed on up to two elevations, are
allowed in the following combinations, not to exceed the allowed sign area based on zoning:
(a) One elevation displaying a business name sign, and one elevation displaying
a business name and a product name sign for a total of three signs; or
(b) One elevation displaying a business name sign, and one elevation displaying
either a business name or a product name sign for a total of two signs; or
(c) One elevation displaying a business name sign or a product name sign for a
total of one sign; or
(d) Two signs, each displaying a separate business name if two tenants are
occupying one unit space for a total of two signs on one elevation.
2. Building signs on interior units of multi-tenant buildings. On multi-tenant buildings,
no more than two signs per tenant on one elevation are allowed in the following combinations,
not to exceed the allowed sign area based on zoning:
(a) One sign displaying a business name, and one sign displaying a product name
for a total of two signs on one elevation; OI
(b) Two signs, each displaying a separate business name if two tenants are
occupying one unit space for a total of two signs on one elevation; or
S"'
(c) One sign displaying a business name for a total of one sign on one elevation;
or
(d) One sign displaying a product name for a total of one sign on one elevation.
3. Design similarity. All business signs mounted on a building shall be similar in
design.
4. Multi-tenant building signage. Building facade signage on multi-tenant buildings
shall be evenly distributed between all tenants.
5. Product name signs. Product name signs shall be subordinate to business name
Signs.
6. Roof signs. No sign mounted upon a building is allowed to project above the highest
outside wall or parapet wall.
7. Roof signs in BP and RD districts. In BP and RD districts, no roof signs shall be
allowed.
8. Sign area. No signs or cornbination of signs mounted upon a building shall cover in
excess of ten percent of the gross area of a side in the RD and BP zoning districts, and 20 percent
of the gross area of a side in all other zoning districts, where business signs are allowed.
A sign displayed on or in any window shall not occupy more than 25 percent of the area
of the windows and/or doors on the side of the building on which the window sign is displayed.
The area of a window/door sign shall be included in the calculation of the sign area allowed for
building-mounted signs provided herein and shall not exceed the applicable sign area permitted.
Window/door signs shall be allowed only on the building facade that has building-mounted
signage. No window or door sign, in whole or in part, shall be displayed in the area of the
window or door that is higher than four feet and less than six feet, as measured vertically, from
the finished interior floor elevation. Any sign not exceeding a two square feet area that depicts
Open/Closed or hours of operation shall be exempt from permit and permit fee requirements.
The permit fee for a window or door sign shall be required only with the first window or door
sign displayed by the applicant unless additional signs or signs in new locations are displayed.
9. Sign projection. No sign mounted upon a building is allowed to project more than 18
inches from the vertical surface of the building.
10. Temporary signs for special business sales. Any commercial use may have up to
three signs fOI the purpose of promoting a special sales event, provided the signs may not be
displayed for no more than ten days within a 60-day period. The 60-day period shall commence
on the first day of posting a temporary sign and conclude 60 days thereafter. The temporary signs
shall not exceed an aggregate total area of 25 square feet. The sign permit application shall
specify the days, not to exceed ten, on which the temporary sign will be displayed.
(,
11. Canopy signage. Canopy signage is limited to the business name and/or logo, and
shall not exceed 20 percent of the canopy facade, excluding corporate color raceway. No more
than one canopy sign for each street frontage shall be permitted on a canopy for the business
located upon the property; illumination is limited to business name and/or logo.
F. Freestanding business signs, standards.
1. Freestanding ground signs. Up to one allowed per building. Such signs shall be
limited to seven feet total height, with four-foot maximum height of sign area.
2. Pylon signs. Up to one allowed per building. When used, a pylon sign is allowed in
lieu of a freestanding sign. No pylon sign may be located within 300 feet of any other pylon sign,
measured on the same side of the street. No pylon signs shall project more than 27 feet above the
. lot level, roadway level, or a specified point between the two levels as determined by the council.
The level used shall be based upon visibility factors from the adjacent roadway(s). The applicant
shall submit diagrams, drawings, pictures and other information requested by the city prior to
action by the council upon the application. No pylon sign shall exceed 125 square feet in area per
side except pylon signs authorized under subparagraph C, below. In the RD and BP districts, no
pylon signs shall be allowed.
3. Major complex. When an area identification is required, such as for a shopping
center, major apartment complex, or major industrial building, up to one freestanding or pylon
sign may be allowed for each major adjacent street. The council shall determine the maximum
size after reviewing the applicable conditions including terrain, safety factors, etc.
4. Freeway locations. An on-premises pylon sign for identification purposes is allowed
for a business sign located directly adjacent to a freeway within the city. Any business that
acquires a permit to erect a pylon sign for freeway identification may be allowed an additional
freestanding ground sign to be located on the side of the property opposite of the freeway. All
signs must comply in all other respects with the provisions of this section. A freeway shall be
defined as a pIincipal arterial highway as defined in the comprehensive plan.
5. Multi-lot developments. In multi-lot developments, the design and placement of
monument and directional signs shall be coordinated through an overall signage plan.
G. Exemptions. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this section, the following signs are
exempt from the permit or fee provisions of this section. No exempt sign shall exceed 16 square
feet of area except where stated below:
1. For sale, lease, or rent signs of real estate when located on the property advertised,
and when under 16 square feet in total copy area.
2. Church, hospital, or school directional signs, less than six square feet in total copy
area.
;
3. One on-property church sign for each church site.
4. Signs warning of hazardous conditions.
5. Simple information signs, such as "exit," "loading dock," etc.
6. Simple nameplate signs on or over the entrance to a place of business or used to
identify the parking area of a place of business. Not to exceed three squaIe feet in gross area.
7. Signs erected by a recognized unit of government having jurisdiction in the city, or a
school district within the boundaries of the school district.
8. Political signs for a period of up to ten days after an election, provided such signs
contain the name and address of the individual responsible fOI erecting and removing the sign.
9. Temporary signs for special civic events or garage or neighborhood sales, for a period
not to exceed 20 days.
H. Nonconforming signs.
1. The protective inspections department shall order the removal of any sign erected or
maintained in violation of the law as it existed prior to the effective date of this section. Removal
shall be in accordance with this subdivision.
2. Other signs existing on the effective date of this section and not conforming to its
provisions, but which did conform to previous laws, shall be regarded as nonconforming signs
which may be continued if properly repaired and maintained as provided in this section and if in
conformance with other provisions of the City Code. If said signs are not continued with
conformance of above, they shall be removed in accordance with this subdivision.
1. Sign permits and fees.
1. Sign permits. No signs, except those specified in this subdivision, above, shall be
erected or maintained anywhere in the city without first obtaining a sign permit.
2. Application, permit and fees. A formal application together with accompanying
documents prescribed by the city shall be submitted to the city to obtain a sign permit. Permit
fees are as adopted by resolution of the city council and shall accompany the permit application.
If any sign is placed, erected, or installed without first obtaining a sign permit, then the permit
fee shall be the amount equal to two times the permit fee.
3. Review of applications. The community development department shall consider
approval of all sign permit applications, except that applications for approval of permits for
advertising signs, pylon signs and any sign requiring a variance shall be submitted to the council
for final approval. Freestanding signs exceeding seven feet in height shall require a footing and
e
foundation inspection by the protective inspections division and all building code requirements
shall be met.
4. Return of the fees. In the event said application shall be denied, the city shall return
the applicant's permit fee, less a reasonable amount determined by the council which shall be
retained as an administrative cost.
J. Removal. All signs which have not been removed within the designated time period may
after due notice be removed by the city, and any expense incurred thereof may be charged to the
sign owner 01 assessed against the property on which they are located.
K. Dynamic Display Signs.
1. Findings. Studies show that there is a correlation between dynamic displays on
. signs and the distraction of highway drivelS. Distraction can lead to traffic accidents. Drivers can
be distracted not only by a changing message, but also by knowing that the sign has a changing
message. Drivers may watch a sign waiting for the next change to occur. Drivers are also
distracted by messages that do not tell the full story in one look. People have a natural desire to
see the end of the story and will continue to look at the sign in order to wait for the end.
Additionally, drivers are more distracted by special effects used to change the message, such as
fade-ins and fade-outs. Finally, drivers are generally more distracted by messages that are too
small to be clearly seen or that contain more than a simple message. Time and temperature signs
appear to be an exception to these concerns because the messages are short, easily absorbed, and
become inaccurate without frequent changes.
Despite these public safety concerns, there is merit to allowing new technologies to easily
update messages. Except as prohibited by state or federal law, sign owners should have the
opportunity to use these technologies with certain restrictions. The restrictions are intended to
minimize potential driver distraction and to minimize proliferation in residential districts where
signs can adversely impact residential character.
Local spacing requirements could interfere with the equal opportunity to use such
technologies and are not included. Without those requirements, however, there is the potential
for numerous dynamic displays to exist along any roadway. If more than one dynamic display
can be seen from a given location on a road, the minimum display time becomes critical. If the
display time is too short, a driver could be subjected to a view that appears to have constant
movement. This impact would obviously be compounded in a corridor with multiple signs. If
dynamic displays become pervasive and there are no meaningful limitations on each sign's
ability to change frequently, drivers may be subjected to an unsafe degree of distraction and
sensory oveIload. Therefore, a longer display time is appropriate.
A constant message is typically needed on a sign so that the public can use it to identify
and find an intended destination. Changing messages detract from this way-finding purpose and
could adversely affect driving conduct through last -second lane changes, stops, or turns, which
could result in traffic accidents. Accordingly, dynamic displays generally should not be allowed
to occupy the entire copy and graphic area of a sign.
q
In conclusion, the city finds that dynamic displays should be allowed on signs but with
significant controls to minimize their proliferation and their potential threats to public safety.
2. Dynamic display sign means any sign, except governmental signs, with dynamic
display characteristics that appear to have movement or that appear to change, caused by any
method other than physically removing and replacing the sign or its components, whether the
apparent movement or change is in the display, the sign structure itself, or any other component
of the sign. This includes a display that incorporates a technology or method allowing the sign
surface to change the image without having to physically or mechanically replace the sign
surface or its components. This also includes any rotating, revolving, moving, flashing, blinking,
or animated display and any display that incorporates rotating panels, LED lights manipulated
through digital input, "digital ink" or any other method or technology that allows the sign surface
to present a series of images or displays.
3. Dynamic display signs are allowed subject to the following conditions:
(a) Dynamic display signs are subordinate to off-premises signs, monument and
pylon signs, and business signs. Dynamic displays must not be the predominant feature
of the sign surface. The remainder of the sign must not have the capability to have
dynamic displays even if not used. Dynamic display signs are allowed only on
monument and pylon signs for conditionally permitted uses in residential districts and for
all uses in other districts, subject to the requirements of this Section 11.70. Only one,
contiguous dynamic display area is allowed on a sign surface;
(b) A dynamic display may not change or move more often than once every 20
minutes, except one for which changes are necessary to correct hour-and-minute, date, or
temperature information. Time, date, OI temperature information is considered one
dynamic display and may not be included as a component of any otheI dynamic display.
A display of time, date, or temperature must remain for at least 20 minutes before
changing to a different display, but the time, date, or temperature information itself may
change no more often than once every three seconds;
(c) The images and messages displayed must be static, and the transition from
one static display to another must be instantaneous without any special effects;
(d) The images and messages displayed must be complete in themselves, without
continuation in content to the next image or message or to any other sign;
( e) Every line of copy and graphics in a dynamic display must be at least seven
inches in height on a road with a speed limit of 25 to 34 miles per hour, nine inches on a
road with a speed limit of 35 to 44 miles per hour, 12 inches on a road with a speed limit
of 45 to 54 miles per hour, and 15 inches on a road with a speed limit of 55 miles per
hour or more. If there is insufficient room for copy and graphics of this size in the area
allowed under clause (a) above, then no dynamic display is allowed;
(t) Dynamic display signs must be designed and equipped to freeze the device in
one position if a malfunction occurs. The displays must also be equipped with a means to
10
immediately discontinue the display if it malfunctions, and the sign owner must
immediately stop the dynamic display when notified by the city that it is not complying
with the standards of this ordinance;
(g) Dynamic display signs must comply with the brightness standards contained
in subdivision L below;
(h) Dynamic display signs existing on (insert the effective date of this ordinance)
must comply with the operational standards listed above. An existing dynamic display
that does not meet the structural requirements in clause (b) may continue as a non-
conforming development subject to section (insert ordinance section number). An
existing dynamic display that cannot meet the minimum size requirement in clause (e)
must use the largest size possible for one line of copy to fit in the available space.
.,(i) Exceptions. Recognizing that some dynamic displays, sucljas those used in
point of sale dispensers, interactive vending machines and ATMs"of(en need to change
images more fIequently than defined by this ordinance in order to/perform their intended
function and that such image changes can occur in a manneI in which they do not create
distractions for drivers, dynamic displays with a total area of less than 160 square inches
at any point of sale dispenser, interactive vending machines or ATM may be fully
animated, provided they do not flash or blink in a manner clearly visible from the
roadway and provided they either meet or exceed the building setbacks for the zoning
district in which they are located or are at least 30' from the public right of way,
whichever is greater.
4. Incentives. Off-premises signs do not need to serve the same way-finding function as
do on-premises signs; they are restricted in number by the city; and they are in themselves
distracting and their removal serves public safety. This clause is intended to provide an incentive
option for the voluntary and uncompensated removal of off-premises signs in certain settings.
This removal results in an overall advancement of one or more of the goals set forth in this
section that should more than offset any additional burden caused by the incentives. These
provisions are also based on the recognition that the incentives create an opportunity to
consolidate outdoor advertising services that would otherwise remain distributed throughout the
community and expand the function of off-premises signs to serve a public purpose by providing
community and public service messages.
A. Incentive Option A - Reduction of Sign Surfaces
(a) A person may obtain a permit for an enhanced dynamic display sign on one
surface of an existing off-premises sign if the following requirements are met:
(i) The applicant agrees in writing to reduce its off-pIemises sign surfaces
by one by permanently removing, within 15 days after issuance of the permit, one
surface of an off-premises sign in the city that is owned or leased by the applicant
and is depicted in table A (which follows this section), which sign surface must
satisfy the criteria of parts (ii) and (iii) of this subsection. This removal must
include the complete removal of the structure and foundation supporting each
II
removed sign surface. The applicant must agree that the city may remove the sign
surface if the applicant does not timely do so, and the application must identify
the sign surface to be removed and be accompanied by a cash deposit or letter of
credit acceptable to the city attorney sufficient to pay the city's costs for that
removal. The applicant must also agree that it is removing the sign surface
voluntarily and that it has no right to compensation for the removed sign surface
under any law. Replacement of an existing sign surface of an off-premises sign
with an enhanced dynamic display sign does not constitute a removal of a sign
surface.
(ii) The city has not previously issued a dynamic display sign permit
based on the removal of the particular sign surface relied upon in this permit
application.
(iii) If the removed sign surface is one for which a state permit is
required by state law, the applicant must surrendered its permit to the state upon
removal of the sign surface. The sign that is the subject of the dynamic display
sign permit cannot begin to operate until proof is provided to the city that the state
permit has been surrendered.
(b) If the applicant complies with the permit requirements noted above, the city
will issue an enhanced dynamic display sign permit for the designated off-premises sign.
This permit will allow a dynamic display to occupy lOO percent of the potential copy and
graphic area and to change no more frequently than once every eight seconds. The
designated sign must meet all other requirements of this ordinance.
B. Incentive Option B - Provision of Community and Public Service Messaging
(a) A person may obtain a permit for an enhanced dynamic display sign on one
surface of an existing off-premises sign if the following requirements are met:
(i) The enhanced dynamic display sign replaces an existing surface of an
existing off-pIemises sign;
(ii) The city has not pIeviously issued a dynamic display sign permit
based on the Ieplacement of the particular sign surface relied upon in this permit
application.
(iii) The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the city to provide to
the city no less than 5 hours (2250 eight-second spots) per month per enhanced
dynamic display sign in the city for community and public service messages at
such times as shall be determined by the city.
(b) If the applicant complies with the permit requirements noted above, the city
will issue an enhanced dynamic display sign permit for the designated off-premises sign.
This permit will allow a dynamic display to occupy lOO percent of the potential copy and
I~
graphic area and to change no more frequently than once every eight seconds. The
designated sign must meet all other requirements of this ordinance.
L. Brightness Standards.
1. All signs must meet the following brightness standards:
(a) No sign may be brighter than is necessary for clear and adequate visibility.
(b) No sign may be of such intensity or brilliance as to impair the vision of a
motor vehicle driver with average eyesight or to otherwise interfere with the driver's
operation of a motor vehicle.
(c) No sign may be of such intensity or brilliance that it interferes with the
effectiveness of an official traffic sign, device or signal.
2. The person owning or controlling the sign must adjust the sign to meet the brightness
standards in accordance with the city's instructions. The adjustment must be made immediately
upon notice of non-compliance from the city. The person owning or controlling the sign may
appeal the city's determination through the following appeal procedure:
(a) After making the adjustment required by the city, the person owning or
controlling the sign may appeal the city's determination by delivering a written appeal to
the city clerk within 10 days after the city's non-compliance notice. The written appeal
must include the name of a person umelated to the person and business making the
appeal, who will serve on the appeal panel.
(b) Within five business days after receiving the appeal, the city must name a
person who is not an official or employee of the city to serve on the appeal panel. Within
five business days after the city names its representative, the city's representative plust
contact the sign owner's representative, and the two of them must appoint a third member
to the panel, who has no relationship to either party.
(c) The appeal panel rnay develop its own rules of procedure, but it must hold a
hearing within five business days after the third member is appointed. The city and the
sign owner must be given the opportunity to present testimony, and the panel may hold
the hearing, or a portion of it, at the sign location. The panel must issue its decision on
what level of brightness is needed to meet the brightness standards within five business
days after the hearing commences. The decision will be binding on both parties.
3. All signs installed after (insert the effective date of this ordinance) that will have
illumination by a means other than natural light must be equipped with a mechanism that
automatically adjusts the brightness in response to ambient conditions. These signs must also be
equipped with a means to immediately turn off the display or lighting if it malfunctions, and the
sign owner or operator must immediately turn off the sign or lighting when notified by the city
that it is not complying with the standards in this section.
13
TABLE A
TABLE INSET:
Surfaces SF/ SF
Ref Address (PID #) Location Surface Total
#
2750 Sibley Mem. 1-494 between Hwy. 13 & 2 624 1,248
1 Hwy. Pilot Knob Rd.
(103288501001 )
2750 Sibley Mem. 1-494 between Hwy. 13 & 2 672 1,344
2 Hwy. Pilot Knob Rd.
(103288501001)
2950 Hwy. 55 Hwy. 55, junction with 2 250 500
3 (100010001055) Hwy. 149
3875 Sibley Mem. Hwy. 13, between Cedar 2 250 500
4 Hwy. Ave. & Rahn Rd.
(100190001102)
4151 Sibley Mem. Hwy. 13, between Cedar 1 250 250
5 Hwy. Ave. & Diffley Rd.
(100190001356)
3700 Cedar Ave. Hwy. 77, north of Hwy. 13 2 378 756
6 (100180001156) (on railroad)
2196 Cedar Ridge Hwy. 77, between Diffley 2 378 756
7 Court Rd. and Cliff Rd.
(101682102001)
3801 Sibley Mem. Hwy. 77, north of Hwy. 13 2 378 756
8 Hwy.
(107550001000)
Soo Line right of-way, 480 480
1181 Trapp Rd. south of 1-494 and west of 1
9 (beyond NE Corner) Hwy. 55 {I} {20} {20}
(102250005108) (added 9/5/99)
1255 Trapp Rd. 1-494, junction of I-35E 2 378 756
10 (1022250014001)
2750 Eagandale
Blvd. Soo Line right-of-way, 2 360 720
11 (beyond NW Hwy. 55, west ofI-35E
Corner)
(102250014307)
14
Section 2. Ordinance No. 412 as adopted June 19, 2007 is hereby rescinded in its
entirety.
Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect upon its adoption and
publication according to law.
ATTEST:
CITY OF EAGAN
City Council
Maria Petersen
Its: City Clerk
By:
Mike Maguire
Its: Mayor
. By:
Date Ordinance Adopted: October 2, 2007
Date Ordinance Published in the Legal Newspaper: October 6, 2007
Date of Advisory Planning Commission Hearing: September 25, 2007
IS'
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
DATE:
Greg Copeland, City Manager
Shann Finwall, AICP, Planner
Concept Review for a Dynamic Display Sign
Simon Properties Group, Owners of the Maplewood Mall
Maplewood Mall - 3001 White Bear Avenue
January 2, 2008 for the January 8 CDRB Meeting
INTRODUCTION
Project Description
Kelly Mikesell, Assistant Vice President of Business Development for Simon Properties, is
requesting concept review for a freestanding digital marquee sign and wallscape signs for the
Maplewood Mall (refer to Attachments 1-5). The digital marquee sign (dynamic display) would be
placed alonll\l\(hite Bear Avenue, to replace one of four freestanding "Maplewood" marquee
signs the mall currently has along White Bear and Beam Avenues. It would be 30 feet high, with
a 10-foot by 22-foot (220 square foot) dynamic display board.
Simon Properties describes the wallscapes as "architecturally designed fa<;:ade-mounted graphic
panels." No size has been indicated by the applicant for the wallscapes, but from the example
elevations submitted they appear to be from 400 to 700 square feet in area. The wallscapes
would be mounted on the mall's exterior walls. Both the digital marquee and the wallscapes
would advertise the Maplewood Mall's tenants and their products.
Request
The city's sign code requires a comprehensive sign plan for "a business premises which occupy
the entire frontage in one or more block fronts or for the whole of a shopping center or similar
development having five or more tenants in the project." The addition of the digital marquee and
wallscapes would require an amendment to the mall's comprehensive sign plan. The applicants
at present, however, are just requesting concept review for these signs in order to obtain
feedback from the Community Design Review Board prior to an official sign plan submittal.
BACKGROUND
Comprehensive Sign Plan: The Maplewood Mall was constructed approximately 30 years ago.
Signage on the exterior of the mall has been approved by the CDRB and city council individually
during the construction or remodeling of the mall or anchor tenants. Therefore, there are no
specific sign criteria for the exterior signage of the mall; just that each sign was approved
individually and was determined to be consistent and compatible with the building and other
signs.
CDRB 2006 Review of Wallscape Proposal: July 25, 2006, the CDRB reviewed a similar
proposal by Simon Properties for two wallscape signs for the east and west elevations of the mall
(refer to Attachment 6). The signs were proposed at approximately 600 and 900 square feet in
area. The CDRB denied Simon Properties' request for the wallscapes indicating that they
resembled on-site billboards, did not complement the architecture of the mall building, and that
Simon Properties should first improve in their existing outdated signage before such an
investment.
November 28, 2007, city staff met with representatives of the Maplewood Mall to discuss their
plans for the digital marquee and wallscape signs. Staff at that time indicated that the city was
currently reviewing a proposed off-site dynamic display sign code amendment. Once complete,
the city would then begin reviewing a possible ordinance to address on-site dynamic displays.
City staff recommended that the proposal be submitted to the CDRB for concept review during
the on-site dynamic display sign code discussions.
DISCUSSION
The owners of the Maplewood Mall, Simon Properties Group, and its subsidiary partnership owns
or has an interest in 285 properties in the United States containing 200 million square feet of
gross leasable area in 39 states plus Puerto Rico. Four of the retail properties are located in
Minnesota including the Maplewood Mall and the Mall of America. Simon Properties Group is
proposing a nationwide initiative to install digital marquees and wallscapes on several of their
malls, including the Maplewood Mall.
Existing Signa'ge
The Maplewood Mall has the following signage which advertises the mall:
1. Entry monuments: Four entry freestanding signs approximately 25 feet in height. The
monuments are located at the entrance to the mall along White Bear and Beam Avenues.
2. Wall signs: One large wall sign on the upper portion of the east elevation and six smaller
wall signs located above the entries on the east and west elevations.
3. Directional signs: Six directional signs located at the end of the driveway entrances. The
signs are six feet in height.
All of the freestanding and building signs, except one, were constructed during the first years that
the mall was open. The wall sign above the east facing entry, next to Barnes and Noble, was
added a few YE1ars ago with the exterior addition of the Barnes and Noble store. The directional
signs were added in 1996. The signs, excluding the new sign, are pink in color and seem
outdated and worn.
Proposed Signage
The Maplewood Mall proposes one 30-foot high, 220 square foot digital marquee sign on White
Bear Avenue. This sign would digitally change messages every 10 seconds. They are also
proposing an unspecified number of wallscape signs on the mall's exterior which are from 300 to
700 square feet in area. These signs would be changed over approximately once a month.
Comprehensive Sign Plan Requirements
Comprehensive sign plans are required for multi-tenant buildings to ensure an improved
relationship between the signs, building, and neighborhood. While the signs may be compatible
to the commercial neighborhood, staff has concerns that the digital marquee and the wallscape
signs will not improve the relationship between the existing signs and building including:
Digital Marquee
1. On-site digital marquees (dynamic displays) have a real potential for nuisances to traffic
and adjacent properties as they can be located close to the street, close to residential
property, and on streets where traffic can be moving from 30 to 55 miles per hour.
2
2. The proposed digital marquee (220 s.f., 30 feet high) would be considerably larger than
the existing marquee (approximately 60 s.f., 25 feet high).
3. The signs will likely display products sold within the mall, rather than the stores located in
the mall or the mall itself.
Wallscape Signs
1. The signs are large and resemble a billboard.
2. The signs are made of a vinyl material which is susceptible to wear and tear.
3. The signs will likely display products sold within the mall, rather than the stores located in
the mall or the mall itself.
As stated by staff in last year's wallscape request, Simon Properties and the city would benefit
more from an update of their existing signs at the mall rather than the addition of these flashy on-
site signs next to their old, outdated signs.
RECOMMENDATION
Review and give comment on the proposed digital marquee and wallscape signs proposed by
Simon Properties for the Maplewood Mall.
PISec 2N\Maplewood Mall\Oynamic Display Concept Review (2006)
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Site Plan
3. Applicant's Narrative
4. Existing Sign Elevations
5. Proposed Sign Elevations
6. July 25, 2006, CDRS Minutes
3
Attachment 1
/7
N
w."
Location Map
s
Attachment 2
:/
i..
__uj
i !
JI !
i i
, i
;~u
L~~
!1-a
J ail ~
~~j~
pj~
'j'"
] . g ~
~ (~~
'!I',
10 ~.
]' ~ i ~j
;;1!1
Uhi
'J'~ ;j
~ ~!~
;;l~d~
I,.,..,
Hl
~ a ij ~
HH
Ii"
. ~ (I;
~
,......,
C/)
I
......NC\1'l
"d8S:e
"" -~.
~ B<n~
"'d "3Zg
o U1~;:::;
o g-"
~ s::: a
!l) !1;'p...
......<......
g. ~ U1
::E~
~
,
~
I
.,
J
0;
o
~
<>i
-.J
'X - ':;;>
o ~ r
g......' -:- .:s-
o ,'0~
~~
\~
N
"
~ ~
'~ ~
<Zl 0
I I
~ -! ,!
~ ~5 ;5
z ., .,
o ~8 58
~ III ;1
<I. I
> I
Ii I
,
,
00 111~ "T II~
0000 II :;;~g: ~
0000
0000 00 """N ~ om
.,,,,,"'''' 00 .0
~:::1:l'" :0'"
~~
I " , ~t; "
0 , ~ . o. ct
~ ~ III l5 0' ~
, ~, , fJ} ~ g !~
:i!~ '. -. . b ffiEffi 0 ~w ]
o. 00 S ~~~ g <0 'g
!!l~rz << n ~ .<
'i! ~~ g~ ~~ >
~",~"l o III t- I-
Attctt.hmerrt :7
SIMON@
Simon Property Group, Inc. .225 West Washington Street. Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
Phone (317) 636-1600. Fax (317) 263-2318. Web http://www/simon.om
12/6/2007
Shann Finwall - Planner
City of Maplewood
1830 County Road BEast
Maplewood, MN 55109
RE: Maplewood Mall- Digital Marquee & Wallscapes
To whom it may concern,
As we mentioned in our meeting, Simon Property Group has recently embarked
on a national initiative to create exterior marketing platforms to further promote its
tenants and the products/services marketed and sold within its properties. At the core of
Simon's strategy is to invest in the development of first-class, state-of-the-art digital
marquees and static wallscapes on the exterior walls of its properties. Both marketing
platforms will be aesthetically pleasing and reinforce to shoppers what Simon malls have
to offer.
We are pleased to note that Maplewood Mall has been selected by Simon as a
property eligible for both a digital marquee and wallscapes.
The proposed digital marquee sign will allow for the display of marketing
messages in a controlled, safe, and non-distracting manner. The proposed digital
marquee will be regulated as to the method of change, length of message, and intensity of
illumination so that the safety of motorists traveling within this commercial corridor will
not be adversely affected. In addition, the content displayed on our digital marquee will
not be flashing or distracting to motorists. The digital marquee we are proposing in the
City of Maplewood would have a rate of change of eight seconds. The image remains
static for eight seconds and then gradually changes to the next image. We have found that
an eight second rate of change goes beyond the typical rate of change that many
municipalities have adopted. Revenue from the digital marquee will generate
incremental taxable revenue for the City of Maplewood.
Through our various meetings with municipalities around the country, we have
found that the brightness ofthe digital marquee is a typical concern. The digital marquee
technology has the ability to dim the brightness of the display based on the level of
natural light available. In other cities, we have found that dimming the display at night is
effective in ensuring that motorists traveling along the roadway are not distracted. The
dimmed display at night will also fit more aesthetically within the commercial corridor
and the City of Maplewood.
For reference, our typical digital marquee sign is 672 square feet at typically 50 to
75 feet in overall height. After meeting with staff and reviewing the surrounding
community, we are proposing to revise an existing free-standing sign along White Bear
Avenue (existing sign: approx. 160 square foot marquee at the overall height of 20 feet
from grade / proposed sign: approx. 220 square foot marquee at the overall height of 30
feet from grade). The proposed size and height of the sign provides motorists traveling
on White Bear A venue adequate legibility and visibility so that messages can be
effectively read. The dimensions of our sign are also consistent with sign industry norms.
From a content perspective, the proposed digital marquee sign will be used to
promote our property's tenants and the products/services marketed or sold on site. The
digital marquee will also display standard promotional messages, as well as offer the
opportunity ,to display community messages to promote local City activities and events.
We have also seen our digital marquees used as part of the Amber Alert program.
The wallscapes are an architecturally designed fayade-mounted graphic panel
used to promote our property's tenants and the products/services marketed or sold on site.
Wallscapes enhance the overall aesthetics ofthe property by converting an otherwise
plain wall into a compelling, relevant image. By way of example, we have attached
pictures of Simon's wallscape program currently in place at Fashion Valley in San Diego,
California.
Thank you again for providing us with the opportunity to discuss our digital
marquee and wallscapes initiatives with your team. We look forward to enhancing the
aesthetics for Maplewood Mall and the City of Maple wood.
Sincerely,
Kelly M. Mikesell
Assistant Vice President Business Development
Simon Brand Ventures
Simon Property Group
225 West Washington Street
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Office Phone: 317-263-7636
Cell Phone: 317-409-9436
Email: kmikescll@simon.com
~Lhmef\t 4
" m I'
. ~ I:
~
~ z ~ n
0 " .
0
N '5
'" ~I <::J
N
"' C
n
E <;> ~
.
> ~...j
0 <xl
2 ~ ~i
w
" 5- ~I fr-
Z c.
" << '2
~
Z g!
w
'" ~
Sit ~!
-II
O. :1, -J)
..cr
.. oj
~~ 0, -us
Zx ~...!
~~ '-
~! ><
.." ~! \JJ
i i
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
i
I
I
w I
"
:$u::
~ci"
. .. (----
:<:l: I
zx
Oe
j..
,....
...,
,...
~O
",,,,
wn:
.~
00
"''''
.'"
6
2:
>-<
Vi
w
"
Z
Z
~
o
O~
ou.
;Ocr
z"
o:l:
zx
9~
,....
.."
~
-I
01
'"
~I
~I
8:1
<<,
.L
I
I
j.."...."_._...c..__.'-.c,_~
"O.,OZ 'xolddV
w
"
:;.
;j\tL
.ocr
ZOO
0:&
zx
9[
,....
.."
8io1-\I\~ Will SIBYlS
t..).i.S11"'j 'NC'\\\ SI'!1i\..5
-
"
.
~
~
o
o
N
'"
N
"
n
E
.
>
o
Z
"
g;
>-'
~u
0::=
wa:
~~
00
"'~
~"
a
2
........
V)
f)tt-ctc..Y\\'Y\ei'\t b
T
I
I
,.o-,O~
0.-
.Q-'oS
0:::;""
.11
~,
""a
~;';
.
Ti
'"
,
ID.I'"
" 10
:gl~
z...~
"
'5
m
~I
~l
~i
01
gj
-J
~.....l
21
8....1
~I
~I
"I
I
I
,~ ~
\.J)o
'-F
~ is"'
"Y .,
;::> ~
~+
c ',_
ZS' '-'
~t.
_Vl
~
. :;-:,
,~
p
S~
woe
"'~
00
"''''
",0
tj
:2
Vi
5> q
~ ~
..o-,Ql
1
-I
"O-'OP------
~
::>
9
~
{~
(
~~
oJ
P
'"
.,
;;
..
o
UJ
;f)
<s..
~
<S'
.i1-
~
<L
:3
I/)
C'-"
0>
C
en
t
Q.)
>
'"C
<(
I....
o
t
<(
c <I)
o E
.s::. 0
(/).s::.
ca"!"
Ii- 0
I
- -
ca :J
E 0
ca- 0
..... ca
ClEo
0...........
.....<1)1::
0..._ 0
.....Eo..
ca <I) c
:J ..... 0
oo..E
2 <1).-
o.s::.(f)
<I) ;::: <I)
0..0.s::.
(/) -
..... <I) c
o c ._
o 0 (/)
B(/)E
:J ;>. ca
0<1).....
<I)-Cl
.s::. ca e
I- > 0..
(/)
:J
o -0_
(/) I- c (/)
1;)..'"0 COO
cag>c(jjU;E
0._ ca n, (/)
..c -0 >- '(ij ~ -
E:Jz(j)ca~
caoo..... <I) 0
..... .!:; (f) :s: .s::. :s:
Cl_ <I) -
e'(ij - c Cl ~
0.. (j) C9 (/) .!:; _ (/)
<I).....C9ca:;E6,
:S .!:; :J ;>. ro e '(ij
1O (/) .--'(ij ~ ...... 0..
<I)<I)~ <l)E
o E > ""(/) I .2:
o ca> (/) _ ca
Nc-o~:s:mO
cao..c.....0..... ca
li-O 0 Cl..... 0-0
- E ClCl<l)
.!:; <I) iU ~ 6 .!:; E
-O:SO:::l.....+:;:t:::"E
<I)...... Clca 0
f; 0 :>; e .9- ~ ~
"" ;>. co..o _ .-
c c ca .- (/) E
:Jca:t::<I)1::00
ca E'-.s::. ca E .....
--l I- I- 0.. 0..
<I) -
.s::.<(
- (f) Cl
..:-:J c
<I) <I) '0..
c .s::. 0..
Cl_ 0
cac.s::.
$'- (/)
c ~ <I)
caca:S
>0..0
.s::.E-
- 0 <I)
.- 0
:s: 0 ca
o...!!! ......
.- -0 :s:
~<I)<I)
(jj E c
c ..... ca
1::0_
cao.s::.
0.. B Cl
(/) :J :J
.- 0 0 .
:5+-'.o~
.s::. (/) <I) c
Cl<l)><I)
Cl _ .-
:::s s... \U s....
o ca .s::. <I)
..... - 0..
.s::..c <I) ><
I-~:S:<I)
/1t)QC hme<\-l- \P
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
TUESDAY, JULY 25,2006
VI. DESIGN REVIEW
a. Maplewood Mall Comprehensive Sign Plan Amendment - 3001 White Bear
Avenue (6:06 - 7:40 p.m.)
Ms. Finwall said Tina Volpe, Director of Marketing for the Maplewood Mall, is proposing two
billboard-style signs on the east and west elevations of the mall.
Ms. Finwall said the signs are called wallscapes and are constructed of BriTex, which is a
white, flexible and durable vinyl substrate material. The signs will advertise the mall products
(I.e., Simon Gift Cards, etc.), mall tenants (I.e., Old Navy, etc.), and ultimately could advertise
the "products" sold by the tenants.
The owners of the Maplewood Mall, Simon Property Group, and its subsidiary partnership
owns or has an interest in 285 properties in the United States containing 200 million square
feet of gross leasable area in 39 states plus Puerto Rico. Four of the retail properties are
located in Minnesota including the Maplewood Mall and the Mall of America. Simon Property
Group is proposing to install wallscape signage at 70 of these properties, including the
Maplewood Mall. There are currently no other malls in the Twin Cities that have wallscape
signage.
Ms. Finwall said there was a correction in the staff report regarding the size of the proposed
signs. The sign marked 750 square feet should be 665 square feet which would be located
between PotBelly's and JCPenney and the sign marked 600 square feet should be 910 square
feet which would be located between Sears and the mall entrance.
Staff finds that the wallscape signs are compatible to the commercial nature of the
neighborhood and the building. However, staff has concerns that these signs will not improve
the relationship between the existing signs including:
1. The signs are large and resemble a billboard.
2. The signs will likely display products sold within the mall, rather than the stores
located in the mall or the mall itself.
3. The signs are made of a vinyl material which is susceptible to wear and tear.
4. Approval of these signs could open the door to the mall refacing the signs with
LED signage similar to the Myth's sign in the future.
5. The existing mall signs including the four monument signs, six of the seven wall
signs and six directional signs are old and outdated.
It's staff's opinion that the addition of the wallscape signs would not meet the intent of the
comprehensive sign plan. Simon Property Group and the city would benefit more from an
update of the existing signs at the mall. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the proposed
comprehensive sign plan amendment to add two wallscape signs.
Board member Schurke asked if staff could provide more of an explanation regarding number
4. in the staff report?
Ms. Finwall said regarding the sign code, the refacing of signs with the same size would
normally be called a reface and would not necessarily require approval by the CDRB. however,
city staff would probably bring a proposed reface of a large sign like these wallscapes before
the CDRB for an amendment to the comprehensive sign plan. Allowing these signs could open
the possibility of the refacing of these signs with the same size LED sign.
Board member Schurke thought that clarification should be made in the sign ordinance. He
said this should not be an exception someone could use.
Ms. Finwall said as an example of refacing a sign is when Dayton's changed to Marshall
Field's and then Marshall Field's changed over to Macy's, staff didn't feel the need to bring
those sign changes to the CDRB for an amendment to the comprehensive sign plan because
basically the new signs are the same size and city staff approved those signs as a refacing
with a sign permit.
Board member Schurke said that is not an LED sign though.
Ms. Finwall ,said correct.
Board member Schurke said if in the event people were refacing signs with the proposal to use
LED that is not refacing and would require coming before the CDRB for approval.
Ms. Finwall said the city council has not reviewed the draft sign ordinance yet so there is still
the opportunity to make amendments to the draft sign code. The CDRB recommended LED
signs with moving and flashing lights be prohibited. Once a large sign is up however, the
possibility of refacing it with the CDRB's approval is still there.
Board member Schurke said the comment made regarding LED signs such as the Myth
Nightclub sign caught his attention and that is why he brought the discussion up.
Board member Hinzman asked what these signs would be classified as in the sign code, is it
classified as a temporary sign, as a banner? If the CDRB amends the sign plan for the mall
what would it involve for raising the total signage allocation for the mall in the future for
possible sign refacements?
Ms. Finwall said signs such as this on another facility (not this large) would be called a
temporary banner sign and the city code currently allows a temporary banner up to 150 square
feet in size and the banner can only be up for 30 days.
Board member Schurke asked if there were any other examples of this type of signage in
Maplewood?
Ms. Finwall said this type of signage is nowhere else in Minnesota.
Acting chairperson Ledvina asked the applicant to address the board.
Ms. Tina Volpe, Director of Marketing for the Maplewood Mall, 3001 White Bear Avenue,
addressed the board. She said they appreciated the board's time in giving them the
opportunity to present the request. They provided an additional packet of information for each
board member for tonight's meeting that provided information on the wallscape program which
they are trying to implement at the Maplewood Mall. She said they compare this type of
signage to more of a banner type advertising. This is something new that is up and coming in
the industry. This would be the first of its kind in the state and no other shopping center in the
state is currently implementing this kind of advertising program. However, at the rate Simon
Property Group is doing this throughout the country they expect other centers will be
implementing these programs at other centers in the twin cities. These types of signs have
been installed in markets as large as New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Atlanta at
premier centers in the country.
Ms. Volpe said wallscapes will allow the mall to advertise the products and services that the
mall and Simon Property Group offers. Ms. Volpe said this would also be an opportunity for the
tenants and retailers to advertise their stores and products. This is the first step in partnering
with the city regarding increasing the market value at Maplewood Mall and being able to be
competitive within the industry. With the new shopping centers like Woodbury Lakes it's
important to continue to draw shoppers into Maplewood Mall.
Board member Hinzman thanked the representatives for their time tonight. He asked how often
they would be changing the wallscape signs out?
Ms. Volpe said when they are partnering with tenants in the mall to advertise there is a minimal
3 month requirement, possibly longer.
Acting chairperson Ledvina said the applicant has proposed two signs on the building exterior
at Maplewood Mall and he asked if they would be coming back before the board with additional
exterior signs anywhere else on the mall exterior?
Ms. Volpe said they don't have any other locations on the building exterior that would allow for
this type of banner signage. These are the two locations that were selected for this type of
wallscape program. She wanted to note the difference between a LED sign and a banner sign
like this wallscape as well as a huge price difference.
Board member Shankar asked if the city allowed you to advertise a "store" and not a "product"
would you still be interested in this wallscape sign?
Ms. Volpe said yes. She said to keep in mind that Champp's Sports may have a Nike shoe
with the Champp's Sports logo on it or the GAP might have someone in denim jeans so in a
sense the product will get advertised on the sign somehow.
Board member Schurke asked if this is the first wallscape sign proposal in Minnesota for the
Simon Property Group?
Ms. Volpe said yes.
Board member Schurke asked if thiswallscape signage was proposed at the Mall of America
since Simon Property Group owns that mall?
Ms. Volpe said no not at this time.
Board member Schurke asked what governs the choice of centers in terms of where you
locate this wallscape?
Ms. Volpe said Simon Property Group is looking at markets that are in the top designated
market area or (DMA). If you are an advertiser or a marketer and you are looking at purchasing
advertising, typically the big guys are going to go to the top DMA's across the country and that
is how Maplewood Mall was selected because we are located in a top DMA.
Board member Shankar asked if Maplewood Mall is the only property managed by Simon
Property Group?
Ms. Volpe said Simon Property Group owns and manages Maplewood Mall, Mall of America,
Miller Hill Mall in Duluth, and the Albertville Outlets.
Board member Shankar asked if Mall of America would be in the top 10 designated market
areas or DMA?
Ms. Volpe said yes.
Board member Shankar said but Simon Property Group has chosen not to have wallscape
signs at the Mall of America?
Ms. Volpe said at this time Simon Property Group has chosen not to advertise there. The Mall
of America is managed differently than Maplewood Mall is. The Mall of America is sort of a city
in itself and has a very different management structure compared to Maplewood Mall. The staff
at the Maplewood Mall is not in touch with the management practices at the Mall of America.
Board member Schurke asked if there had been any opposition to this type of sign age at
centers in other states?
Ms. Volpe said they have not had a problem with most of the wallscapes that have been
implemented. Springfield, Missouri is changing their sign ordinance to accommodate the
program at the Battlefield Mall in Springfield, MissourI. The only center that they know had an
issue in their community was Oehrlein Square in Oehrlein Park Chicago which is a very elite
and upscale area within the Chicago suburbs that recently got approval to do the wallscape
and it was installed last week.
Board member Shankar asked what type of maintenance this type of sign requires?
Ms. Volpe said the wallscape sign is very low maintenance. A sample of the product was
provided in the packet sent to the CDRB. The wallscape product is resistant to weather, wear
and tear, and is fire resistant. The framing system, which is stainless steel is used to install the
wallscape product and would be mounted to the brick wall with brackets. You don't see the
frame of the wallscape when it is up because the weather resistive material wraps around the
frame and snaps in place making the framing invisible.
Board member Shankar asked how the sign is lit?
Ms. Volpe said the sign will not be lit other than by the lights on the building exterior of the mall
and by the lights in the parking lot.
Board member Schurke asked how this wallscape product is different from a billboard sign?
Ms. Volpe said that's a good question. It's not different from a billboard but it's a way to get
their message out. She included information in the packet to the CDRB about the importance
of advertising within the shopping centers and how it benefits the companies and retailers
which helps to increase sales. She said it's getting harder and harder for marketers to get their
message across because everything is getting so fragmented and advertisers are challenged
everyday.
Ms. Volpe said with mass media continuing to fragment into smaller and smaller pieces in
demographics, marketers need to find new ways to get the advertising word out. People are
finding advertising on television is more difficult because people have Tivo and DVR's which
allow people to skip over commercials and the advertising. Consumers are becoming more
empowered by asking to be put on do not call lists, having spam blockers on their computers,
blocking calls and filtering information from advertisers. So marketers and advertisers are
looking at alternative ways to get their message out and the wallscape sign is just another way
of doing that. She said 62% of shoppers make purchasing decisions while they are in a mall.
That includes whether there is a vehicle in the mall advertising a car dealership or car brand or
advertising another product. That type of advertising is called experiential marketing which is
the seeing, feeling and touching of a product in a non-threatening environment.
Board member Schurke said from a market standpoint he finds the analysis interesting. The
role of the, CDRB from a review standpoint is what the impact is aesthetically on the
Maplewood community. If the argument is that there is too much visual noise out there in terms
of marketing and we add more visual noise to rise above that personally it's a hard argument
for him to buy into. He said he has nothing but the highest wish for success for the Maplewood
Mall. Staff brings up a good point regarding beautifying existing signage or making
improvements to the existing signs rather than making an investment in the banner
advertisement of these wallscape signs. Personally he does not see how advertising Visa or
the Simon gift card on these wallscape signs will help the community of Maplewood.
Ms. Volpe said the product being advertised is Visa on the Simon gift card which is sold in the
Maplewood Mall by Simon Property Group. It's just one example of a product that could be
advertised on the wallscape, it could be an advertisement for Children's Place or the GAP.
Board member Schurke asked if there was an update regarding the condition of the current
signage at the mall and what the plan was to update the signage?
Ms. Volpe said as employees of the Maplewood Mall they notice the things that need to be
upgraded and updated every day. They have a five-year plan for Maplewood Mall. What Simon
Property Group looks at is what areas or markets are going to allow them to go above and
beyond. Simon Property Group looks at the wallscape program as the first step. If Simon
Property Group is able to implement something like the wallscape program they look at that as
a positive relationship between the city and the mall to upgrade the exterior. But if Simon
Property Group is not able to participate in things such as the wallscape program Simon
Property Group is going to say "isn't the Maplewood Mall located in the city that would not
allow them to get a permit to implement the wallscape program?"
Mr. Jad Murphy, General Manager, Maplewood Mall, 3001 White Bear Avenue, addressed the
board. Mr. Murphy said if Simon Property Group were to replace the monument signs along
White Bear Avenue those would be brought up to date and made into digital signs such as
what was done at the Myth Nightclub. The future for signage is in digital media. The mall would
come to the CDRB for approval for digital media signage but that is in the future and is very
expensive to do. This wallscape sign is an opportunity for the mall to have advertising at a
lower cost but still have a high impact. Woodbury Lakes is a very nice shopping facility which
has caused sales to go down at Maplewood Mall and the mall is trying to bring sales up in a
tasteful way. He said Simon Property Group would be willing to apply for a temporary sign in
order to test this type of sign at the mall.
Mr. Murphy said one of the biggest problems that could happen within the Twin Cities is if this
wallscape program is not approved in Maplewood other cities "will" approve it. It "will" drive
traffic in other cities and not having this wallscape sign will decline the sales in the Maplewood
Mall. Mr. Murphy said he is not saying this wallscape is going to increase the sales by a certain
percentage but it "will" drive more sales to the mall. The wallscape sign on the mall exterior
gives the consumers the opportunity to see something advertised from White Bear Avenue,
South lawn Drive or Beam Avenue because these signs are this "big". Monument signs don't
drive sales like the wallscape sign would.
Ms. Volpe said one thing Simon Property Group looks at with any renovation or improvement
to the center is the return on the investment. So if Simon Property Group were going to
upgrade the exterior sign age and the monument signs at the mall Simon Property Group will
want to do something that is going to give them a return on their investment if they were going
to invest alotof money in something. Simon Property Group does not look at everything the
same way at the mall but the mall does enhancements to help the mall look better because it's
the best thing for the center. She said they agree the exterior signage needs to be upgraded.
The new regional centers are implementing these types of things.
Board member Hinzman said he looks at the wallscape sign as a "temporary banner". The sign
will be up for a limited time, it's made of a material that is not meant for an extended time.
Under the current sign ordinance banners can be up for 30 days. When he compiles the facts it
appears this is a temporary banner sign to him. He has a concern that if the board were to
designate this as a sign and amend the comprehensive sign plan it really raises the amount of
signage on the mall that could be transformed in ways the CDRB may not see as acceptable in
the future. He wouldn't be in favor of amending the sign code for this wallscape sign. He would
be in favor of looking at this as a temporary sign banner for 30 days but he doesn't think the
applicant would be interested in that because it would be a significant investment for a limited
use.
Board member Shankar said he would have been more sympathetic to this proposal if the
wallscape signs were related to the anchor stores in the mall such as for Kohl's, JCPenney,
Sears and the new Macy's store but the fact that the wallscape signs could be for Simon gift
cards or advertising Visa the next thing could be an advertisement for a Rockport shoe at
Florsheim or a lawn mower at Sears and he is concerned how that is going to look on the
building fagade of the mall.
Acting chairperson Ledvina said he interprets these wallscape signs as a billboard in terms of
how they are designed. With the comprehensive sign plan for the Maplewood Mall the CDRB
is responsible for looking at the signs and how the signs interact with the architecture of the
building and if the signs compliment each other and he doesn't think the wallscape signs are
complimentary to the architecture of the mall building by any means. He said he sympathizes
with the business needs of the mall and the desire to maximize the marketing of the tenants in
the mall but for the larger concern of the city he feels these wallscape signs are very much out
of place here and he is not in favor of this proposal.
Board member Shankar said this signage may fit better in areas like the example in the packet
in Georgia because of the location and the fact that the mall in Georgia has a freestanding sign
but the wallscape sign on the front of the Maplewood Mall doesn't appeal here like it does at
the malls in Georgia as seen in the examples shown in the packet the CDRB received.
Board member Hinzman agreed with those comments.
Board member Shankar said people know what anchor stores are at the mall whether they are
coming from Hudson, Wisconsin or White Bear Lake. The applicant stated these wallscape
signs would draw people to the Maplewood Mall who would be driving in the vicinity to visit the
other tenant stores but he doesn't buy that statement. He believes the anchor stores draw
people to the mall and people will visit the other tenant stores while shopping at the mall. The
development in Woodbury pulls customers because of the specialty stores and the other strip
malls hold anchor stores such as JCPenney and Kohl's etc.
Board member Schurke said he would not presume to know the marketing and advertising
business better than the applicants do. The most important thing to relay to the applicant is
that there is a design expectation in this community which the CDRB is setting a standard for
and the CDRB is trying to not allow variances to that. One thing referenced in the staff report is
the idea to replace the monument sign with a LED sign. He said he wanted the applicants to
clearly kno_wthat currently the draft sign ordinance is disallowing the use of those types of
signs in the,City of Maplewood. He has been to other communities around the country and the
issue of trying to subdue signage and keep it quieter makes it more conspicuous in his opinion
because it draws your eye to the signage in a pleasant way. Most of the advertising today is in
such a high volume it's almost difficult to get your message above the advertising volume.
From a design standpoint he would challenge the applicant to take the comments from the
CDRB and staff to see what can be done to address the issues at hand.
Board member Hinzman recommends denial of the proposed comprehensive sign plan
amendment to add a 665 and a 910 square foot wallscape sign on the east and west elevation
of the Maplewood Mall located at 3001 White Bear Avenue. Denial is based on the fact that the
wallscape signs will not improve the relationship between the existing signs as required by the
sign code for a comprehensive sign plan.
Board member Schurke seconded.
Ayes - Hinzman, Ledvina, Schurke,
Shankar
The motion to deny passed.
Ms. Finwall said the applicant can file an appeal with the city council within 15 days in writing
and then it would go to the city council for review. Staff thanked the applicants for their time.
(The applicant told staff they planned to appeal the board's decision to deny the proposal.)