HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/08/2008
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
TUESDAY, JANUARY 8,2008
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Olson called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Board member John Demko
Vice-Chairperson Matt Ledvina
Chairperson Linda Olson
Board member Ananth Shankar
Board member Matt Wise
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Staff Present:
Shann Finwall, Planner
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Board member Ledvina moved to approve the agenda as submitted.
Board member Olson seconded.
The motion passed.
Ayes - all
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a. December 11, 2007
Board member Wise moved approval of the minutes of December 11, 2007 as submitted.
Board member Demko seconded
The motion passed.
Ayes - all
V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a. On-Site Dynamic Display Sign Code Discussion
Planner Shann Finwall presented the staff report and asked the board comment on issues
regarding dynamic display signs in the city. Ms. Finwall also asked the board for their
comments regarding issues with public service messages.
In response to a previous question from the board, Planner Finwall said the League of
Minnesota Cities has advised that a total ban of dynamic display signs is legal and an
option. Board member Wise said he is not in favor of a total ban on dynamic display signs.
Board member Shankar said he thinks the rules should be the same for both on-site and
off-site signs, but feels there will be fewer issues with on-site signs due to the generally
lower driving speeds in front of properties where those signs might be constructed.
Board member Ledvina agreed a total ban of dynamic display signs is not feasible. Mr.
Ledvina had questions on why setbacks are not related to land use and why dynamic signs
are not prohibited in some zoning districts in the city of Minnetonka's ordinance. Mr. Ledvina
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 01-08-2008
2
feels the Minnetonka ordinance is a good example and said he recommends the board use
the Minnetonka ordinance as a guide. Mr. Ledvina requested staff research whether the city
of St. Paul's on-site ordinance has been adopted. Mr. Ledvina suggested a moratorium on
dynamic display signs would be reasonable until the ordinance is amended.
Board member Wise asked what constitutes unique zoning districts and he had questions
on spacing of dynamic signs. He asked whether there are other cities with examples of sign
spacing. Planner Finwall said she will research these questions and also other cities for
examples of sign spacing and requirements, and also whether the city of St. Paul has
adopted an on-site ordinance.
Board member Demko said he agrees with using the city of Minnetonka ordinance as a
guide. Mr. Demko said he has questions with the 20-minute display time and also the 15-
foot maximum height requirement.
Board member Shankar said he also agrees with using the Minnetonka ordinance as a
guide. He has questions on the number of signs allowed per property and with having
differences in display time for on-site and off-site dynamic signs.
Board member Ledvina, noting the competition among advertisers, said he has strong
concerns with having too many signs in high-traffic areas in the near future with displays
changing continually.
Board member Olson suggested the board move ahead with this review. Ms. Olson
suggested the need for language to regulate the "blinking, flashing and fluttering" of signs,
and the need to review the setback distance and sign spacing issues, change time of
displays, and necessary language defining public service message.
Planner Finwall asked the board whether only freestanding dynamic signs will be
considered.
Board member Olson responded that non-freestanding signs also need to be considered.
VI. DESIGN REVIEW
a. Concept Review - Maplewood Mall Dynamic Display Sign
Planner Finwall presented the staff report. Ms. Finwall said the request for concept review is to
allow feedback to the applicant prior to an official sign request submittal. Ms. Finwall explained the
comprehensive sign plan requirements pertaining to this request.
Ms. Laurie Van Dalen, with Simon Properties of the Maplewood Mall, explained their proposal for
digital marquee and wallscape signs. Ms. Van Dalen said the digital marquee sign location is
proposed on White Bear Avenue and that the sign location determines what size sign should be
proposed. Ms. Van Dalen said the sign would be used for promoting tenants and advertising
products and services marketed or sold on the site.
Ms. Van Dalen exhibited examples of Simon Properties' wallscapes constructed in various other
malls which are used to advertise products and services of tenants.
Board member Ledvina asked Ms. Van Dalen if Coca Cola is a tenant of the Maplewood Mall and if
they occupy space at the Mall.
Community Design Review Board
Minutes 01-08-2008
3
Ms. Van Dalen explained that Coca Cola has a lease agreement for their machines located at the
Mall and for some special promotions at the Mall.
Ms. Van Dalen explained that the signs would promote tenants of the Mall and a few surrounding
businesses that the Mall has contracts with. She said the signs would operate 24-hours daily. She
explained that the sign would be monitored electronically with a camera and sensors and if a
malfunction was observed, it would be corrected on-site. She said the Mall would have control of
the sign since they would be the owner of the sign.
Board member Shankar said he prefers that the architectural design element be considered as part
of a wallscape sign design rather than hanging a sign anywhere on a wall without consideration of
the building's design.
Board member Olson said she would prefer that Maplewood Mall update their existing signage
before considering new wallscape and digital marquee signage.
Board members Ledvina and Wise both agreed with Mr. Shankar that the building's design should
be considered when installing a wallscape sign and said this issue would be part of the review of
any future request for a wallscape sign installation.
Board member Wise asked Ms. Van Dalen to consider the square footage for a wallscape sign
display as it pertains to the footage of their approved existing sign-which would mean that 35% of
the existing pylon sign footage is what might be allowed.
Ms. Van Dalen thanked the board members for their time and comments.
Board member Olson asked staff to obtain a copy of sign ordinances for the cities of Woodbury
and St. Paul for review by the board. She also mentioned she is having a hard time understanding
applicants' requests for the state minimum display time of eight seconds for dynamic display signs.
VII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
Council member John Nephew, 628 County Road D, Maplewood, addressed the board and said
he is open to their comments.
VIII. BOARD PRESENTATIONS
None
IX. STAFF PRESENTATIONS
a. Comprehensive Plan Update
Planner Finwall requested that board members complete the visioning worksheets they received
regarding barriers to the comprehensive plan process and return them to her within the next week.
Ms. Finwall reported the parks, trails and open space advisory committee has met several times
and visited some sensitive areas such as south Maplewood.
X. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:50 p.m.