SUNFISH LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING – JULY 21, 2010

7:00 P.M. - ST. ANNE’S EPISCOPAL CHURCH

Attendants:

      Chair:  Andrea McCue.

      Commissioners:   Arnulf Svendsen, JoAnne Wahlstrom, and Tom Schlehuber.

City Planner:  Laurie Smith           
City Clerk: Catherine Iago
Commissioner Tom Votel arrived at 7:05 p.m.

I.    CALL TO ORDER:   Chair Andrea McCue opened the meeting at 7:00 p.m.    

II.  MINUTES:  Chair McCue asked if there were any additions or corrections to the March 10, 2010 minutes and there was no response.
     
Commissioner Wahlstrom moved to approve the March 10, 2010 Planning Commission minutes as submitted, seconded by Commissioner Svendsen and carried.  (4-0)

III. Planning Items:

A. Public Hearing – Proposed Sign Ordinance Amendment:    Chair McCue asked the Planner to review the proposed Sign Ordinance and any changes from the existing version.
 
Planner Smith explained the proposed sign ordinance revision discussion was initiated last November based on a complaint relating to a large banner sign placed at one of the churches in the City. She stated that after Commission reviewed the existing language and discussed revisions to the existing ordinance, staff determined that it would be best to repeal the existing sign ordinance in its entirety and replace it with the proposed ordinance. She advised that the current ordinance did not include definitions for signs or items associated with signs and the proposed ordinance would include definitions relating to types of signs. She noted that these definitions were drafted to be “content neutral” and describe the types of signs by general appearance and location rather than the type of content portrayed on the sign. She advised that the proposed ordinance is now similar to what all cities have adopted and includes definitions for “Dynamic Display Signs” that have motion and illumination, as well as billboard, roof and temporary signs. She noted that the existing sign ordinance was vague in its language relating to temporary signs and the proposed ordinance requires that all temporary signs must have a permit that is issued by the Planner and also limits the time period for display of temporary signs.

Chair McCue asked who enforces the sign ordinance when a complaint is received. Planner Smith explained that usually the complaint is received by the Mayor or staff and upon determining the type of violation, staff contacts the proper person to handle the complaint; she indicated that some complaints are handled by the Police Department contacting the violator and some are handled by the Planner. She noted that the proposed ordinance now spells out what is allowed and what is prohibited and clearly defines the procedures for obtaining a temporary sign. She further stated that the proposed ordinance also defines the use of temporary signs and real estate signs in residential areas.

Commissioner Wahlstrom questioned if a permit is necessary for real estate signs and the Planner responded no.

Commissioner Schlehuber questioned if permits would be required for events sponsored by the City such as the Buckthorn Bust.

The Planner explained that signs for a City sponsored event would be classified as government signs and are exempt; she advised that government signs, unlike other signage, may also be placed in the right-of-way.

Chair McCue pointed out that temporary signs for City events must be computer generated or printed.

Planner Smith explained that all signs must be legible and may be stenciled or type set; she indicated that the ordinance prohibits spray painted or unsightly signs.    

Commissioner Votel arrived at 7:05 p.m. 

Commissioner Svendsen questioned where banner signs are defined.  Planner Smith indicated that a banner sign would be considered a temporary sign.  He referred to Section 1222.03 and pointed out that a property with multiple tenants could have more than one sign on the property at the same time.   

The Planner explained that temporary signs are limited to one per property, six sq. ft. in size.  Or in the case of a property with multiple tenants, such as St. Anne’s, each tenant would be allowed to have a temporary sign.  The Planner noted that she did not see this as an issue since each temporary sign is limited in size and duration and it is unlikely that the various tenants of the church would need to advertise an event at the same time.

Chair McCue noted that there are several directional signs at the end of her road; however, she believes they would be grand-fathered in.

Commissioner Wahlstrom pointed out that a church may have more than one sign if there is more than one use for the property and multiple activities are being held.

Commissioner Votel commented that there would probably be only one activity at the church and the activities would not overlap.

Commissioner Wahlstrom indicated that a church may be leasing space for another group and there could be overlapping activities.

Clerk Iago suggested that the staff could request that overlapping activities be placed on the same temporary sign.

Planner Smith commented that she does not foresee the churches conducting overlapping events and therefore it should not be an issue.

Commissioner Votel questioned if the City should allow the temporary signs. Planner Smith advised the temporary signs allow the churches an opportunity to advertise special events. She noted that the signs were placed on the church property in the past and by including the definition and time limitation, the City will now have the authority to regulate the use of such signs. She commented that the City may determine if they wish to allow such signs.

After a brief discussion the Commissioners concurred to leave the temporary sign language as proposed.

Chair McCue questioned if the church sign at the corner of Delaware and Highway 110 would be considered a “monument sign”.  Planner Smith responded yes.

Chair McCue asked if all the church signs comply with the 50 sq. ft. regulation as proposed. Planner Smith advised that she was unable to find the exact dimensions of the sign at Delaware and Highway 110, but she had determined that the other two churches are close to the 50 sq. ft. regulation. She noted that St. Anne’s Church sign is a different configuration and was granted a variance. She explained that these signs are larger since they are adjacent to higher speed limit roads and the lettering is easier to read. She further explained that the current signs are grandfathered and that they will have to comply with the proposed ordinance when they are replaced.

Chair McCue asked if there were any further comments or questions and there was no response.

The Chair opened the public hearing for comments and noted there were no audience members present for the public hearing. 

Chair McCue closed the public hearing at 7:20 p.m. and asked if the Commissioners had any further comments or questions. There was no response.

Commissioner Wahlstrom moved to recommend that the proposed Sign Ordinance be presented to Council for adoption as submitted, seconded by Commissioner Votel and carried. (5-0)
Chair McCue thanked the Planner for her presentation.        

IV. OTHER/NEW BUSINESS:  Planner Smith explained that she has not received any applications to date and the deadline for submission has passed. She advised that the Baird property has been sold and that the property is undergoing interior remodeling; she explained there was an issue with the driveway easement for the property.  The Planner explained the new property owners have applied for a Minor Review to replace some timber steps leading from the house down to the lake.  The Planner advised that Minor Reviews are reviewed administratively and are not sent through the Planning Commission and Council.

Chair McCue asked if the Planner will send formal notice of the August meeting cancellation and Planner Smith responded yes.

Chair McCue asked if there was any further business and there was no response.       

V.  ADJOURN:          Commissioner Svendsen moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:25 p.m., seconded by Commissioner Votel and carried. (5-0)


Respectfully submitted,

______________________

Catherine Iago, City Clerk