09-8321
2
3
4
Amendments to the Grand Avenue Special District Sign Plan
5 WHEREAS, Section 64.601, special district sign plan, 04 the Saint Paul Legislative Code, part of Chapter
b 64, signs, of the Zoning Code, provides for the establishment of speciai comprehensive sign pians for
7 business areas for the purpose of allowing businesses to build upon unique characteristics of certain
8 sections of the city so long as the visual landscape created by the plan is in keeping with the general sign
9 ordinance; and
10 WHEREAS the Grand Avenue Speciaf District Sign Plan, which applies to the area defined by Oakland
I 1 Avenue on the east, Cretin Avenue on the West, and the parallel alleys north and south of Grand Avenue,
12 was originally adopted in 1983 and amended in 1993 and 1996 under the provisions of section 64.601 of
13 the Zoning Code for speciai district sign plans; and
14 WHEREAS, the Grand Avenue Business Association and Summit Hill Association, in 2004, proposed
15 additional amendments to the Grand Avenue Special Sign District; and
16 WHEREAS, Section 64.601 of the Zoning Code requires that changes to special district sign plans must
17 be approved by City Council resolution, after review and recommendation by the Planning Commission,
18 and after public hearings before both the Planning Commission and City Council; and
19 WHEREAS, a public hearing on the proposed amendments to the Grand Avenue Special Sign District
20 was conducted by the Planning Gommission on April 24, 2009, notice of the hearing having been
21 published in compliance with Minnesota Statutes Section 462.357 Subdivision 3 and mailed to affected
s 22 property owners on Grand Avenue and other interested parties; and
23 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Saint Paul recommended on June 5, 2�09, that the
24 City Council approve these recommended amendments to the Grand Avenue Special District Sign Plan;
25 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul, acting pursuant to the
26 provisions of section 64.601 of the Zoning Code for speciai sign districts and following public hearings
27 conducted by the Planning Commission and City Council does hereby approve and adopt the following
28 amendments to the Grand Avenue Special District Sign Plan, to be effective upon the date of the
29 publication of this resolution:
30 Intent and Purpose
31 The Grand Avenue Special District Sign Pian, as provided in Section 64.601 F��1� of the Zoning
32 Code, is intended to provide sign controls for Grand Avenue that build on the unique character and
33 identity of Grand Avenue. It provides for strong, clear identification of businesses on the Avenue. It is
34 intended to reduce the clutter and chaotic diversity of signage that impairs the effectiveness of signs
35 identifying businesses. It is intended to provide design standards for signs to increase their Iegibiiity
36 and impact, to create a more desirable and memorable image for Grand Avenue, to protect property
37 value along the Avenue, and to reflect the pride businesses take in the area.
38 Area Description
39 The Grand Avenue Special District Sign Plan shail apply to the area defined by Oakland Avenue on the
40 east, Cretin Avenue on the west, and the parallel aileys north and south of Grand Avenue.
41 Definitions and Interpretation
Council File # 09-832
GreenSheet# 3071378
09-83�
42 The provisians of this special Sign Districf Plan do not supersede the provisios�s of Chapter 64 &f
43 Signs, of the Zo�ing Code. The provisions of this Plan are supplementary to those of the Zoning Gode,
-- 44 and the most restrictive provision shall appiy. Ail words and terms shall be defiined as in Chapter 64 �6
45 of the Zoning Code of the City of St. Paui.
.,
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
5�
Administration and Enforcement
The zoning administrator shall enforce the provisions of this Plan as a suppiement to Chapter 64 f&
Signs, of the Zoning Code.
, . Whenever a
permit for a sign in the Grand Avenue Speciai Sign District is required under the provisions of Chapter
64 �6 of the Zoning Code, such permit shall not be issued unless the plans for the sign have been
approved by the Zoning Administrator as in conformance with this Plan and Chapter 64 6C, Signs.
Procedures
58 Applications for sign permits in the Grand Avenue Special Sign District shali be submitted to the Zoning
59 Administrator for review and approval. The Zoninq Administrator shall immediate�v notifv the
60 appropriate District Planninq Council. The application submitted io the Zoninq Administrator shall be
61 accompanied by plans of sufficient detail to demonstrate that the proposed sign complies with the
62 provisions of this Pian and shall include at least the following:
63 1. A front elevation (front view) drawing of the sign drawn to scale. This can usually be obtafned from
64 the s+gn company, an architect, or a graphic arts company. The mi�imum scale is one inch = 1
65 foot.
66
67
68
2. Either a front elevation drawing of the building with the proposed sign located on it (minimum scale
Y< inch = 1 foot) or a photo of the building front.
3. A specification sheet describing sign materiais, exact letter size, and type of lighting.
69 The Zoning Administrator shall review the plans within 30 days and notify the applicant of the decision
70 to approve or disapprove the plans. Written reasons for denial shatl accompany any decision to
71 disapprove the pians. Decisions by the Zoning Administrator may be appealed to the Board of Zoninq
72 A eals P-Faa�iny-Se�aaissier� under the provisions of Section 61.761 of the Zoninq Code.
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
A fee to cover the costs of the review shall be established by resolution of the City Council.
- - .:�:.:�.
.. - - - - - - - - - - -
.
:� - - - - - - - - --
85 Business Signs
enforcement provisions of Chapter 61 Articie IX 61.900. Enforcement, of the Zoninp Code.
.�zr.sr.�ar_r.n
09-83�
86 Business signs, signs �{a that identifv and direct attention to the business on the premises ptay an
87 important ro�e in informing customers about the types and Iocation of businesses on Grand Avenue.
88 Business signs are important for the quality of Grand Avenue as a commercial streei and are the signs
89 that shouid be the most visible.
90
41
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100 Business signs may take the form of wall signs, �s projecting signs, freestandinq pe4e-st�s
101 � signs temporary siqns, and portable siqns. .
102 The location of business signs oriented to vehicular tra�c should be coordinated to make them easier
103 to find and read. The sum of the gross surface displav area in spuare feet of all business siqns on a lot
104 shall not exceed one (11 times the lineal feet of lot frontacae or seventY-five (75) square feet, whichever
105 is qreater.
106 Sign materials shail be compatible with the oriqinai construction materials and architectural stVle of the
107 buildinp facade on or near which thev are placed. Natural materials such as wood and metal are
108 qenerally more appropriate than piastic.
109
I10
111
112
Siqns with dvnamic displav are prohibited.
Wall Signs
Wall signs should be located on the sign bands of building facades over the entry or display windows of
a business. Wall signs shall cover neither wirtdows nor architecturai trim and detail.
113 Letters on wall signs shall be no more than eighteen (18) inches in height
114
115 Because wall signs
116 are almost always seen from an angle, extended typefaces should be used. Viewing from an angle
117 diminishes the apparent width and spacing of the letters. Bold type with light letteri�g on a dark
118 background is recommended for maximum legibility.
119
120 .
121
122 .
123 Signs more than #�"'°".�-.�•y—'� thirty f301 feet above the ground are out of the viewer's normal vision
124 range and are of little value. The highest point on a wall sign shall be no more than *��°^�^�` thiRv
125 � feet above grade.
126
I27
128
129
130
�+-v�T�
- - - - - - - - •
09-83�
131 Projecting Signs
132 A projecting sign is a sign other than a wali sign which projects from and is supported by a wail or a
-- 133 building or structure.
134 .
135 Projecting symbolic or business name signs are
136 permitted.
137
138 There shall be a minimum of thirtv (30) feet of lot frontage oer proiectinq sipn. and a proiectinq sign
139 shali be a minimum distance of thirtv i30) feet from anv other proiectinq siqn.
140 . Care should be exercised in mounting so that signs are
141 generally in the same height zone for ease in spotti�g but do not block each other out. A projecting
142 sign shall not be located below a wall sign if it would obstruct the view of the wal! sign.
143 Proiectinq signs shall have a maximum gross surface display
144 area of b••°..�;T��i� sixteen (161 square feet ep r side. The highest point on a projecting sign shall be no
145 more than �•�°~��; thirt 30 feet above grade.
146
147
148
144
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
Freestandinp Aele Signs
There shall be no more than one freestandinq pele sign per #e�Ey-(48} feeE lot is
freestandinq sican. Freestandinq Rale signs shall be set back at
least five (5) feet from all propeRV lines and have a maximum gross surface display area of twentv four
��"'°� square feet per side. The highest point on a freestanding {�sle sign shail be no more
than twenty (20) feet above grade• if located within a required vard, it shall be no more than eiqht (8)
fieet above qrade. Freestandinq Reie signs shail be stationary (may not revolve) and have as little
structure as possible. Sign illumination should be done in such a way thai liqht sqiilover on adiacent
proqerties is minimized.
e - , . - , . - • - , - - , •• - - - - • - .• - _ , . - .. :�sa�:+�e:rrsma�±r.�r.
� .. . - - - - - - - -- - -
. - - - - - - - _ - - - -
.� - - - - - - - - -
. -- -
.. -- - - - - - --
. -- - - - -
. • =-= - - - �---- - - - -- -- - - - -- -- - - - -
- -- - • - - --- -
1 e- - •- - - -_ _ • -- ' -•.- - - -- - - -•- - -
- ` - ''
.
173
74
75
Window Signs
� - - - - - - '
� - - - - - - - - - -
09-83�
177 Window signs, inctudinq temporarv window sipns, should not exceed 30% of the store window glass
178 area. The lettering of the business name should not exceed twe{ve (12) si* inches in height. The
179 lettering for other information shouid not exceed one inch in height.
180 .
181 Temporary window signs add to visual clutter and should be used only to advertise the property for
182 sale. rent, or lease, or for specific short-term sales for no more than three (3) nonconsecutive times per
183 calendar vear for a period of not more than thirtv (30) davs per time. Old paper signs are easily
184 associated with "going out of business" sales.
185 , .
186
187
188
1&9
190
141
192
143
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
Z02
203
Temporarv Sians
Portable Siqns
[moved]
Pf9&E�1l+rES [moved]
Adopted by Councll: Date ���� C> G t
Adoptiem6ertif y o i1 Secretary
/
By' ; �t'
Approved M o. a �i �
By:
Requested by Depariment of;
. _ ,
sy: c�
Form Appypv�d tp� CiTy Attom�y
By: 8� L��1�, b 2�( — v�j
Form Apofl��ed bv Mayor for Submissiol� to Council
BY� ° �0.�..A � J�J_�C1 . � �
Approved by the Office of Financial Services
;�
$Y� . , �
- -' ,_ " - - - "
�`
�
09-832
Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet
C�
�
Depar6nent/Office/Council: Date Initiated: n � r
PE _PlanningBEconomic 08-JUN-09 Green Sheet N-O : -- 34��J7" - � -- �� �
Development, . _ - -- -- �- -- - �� �-
Conpct Person & Phone• � DeoartrneM SeM To Person inNialfDate
EmiivGoodman 0 lannin &EconomicDevelo me DonnaDmmmond b�� 09
6-6551 1 �lannin¢ & Economic Developme DirectorlC. Bedor _
Must Be on Council Agentla by �(D Number Z ity Attocney Ci Attome 1�_ _��{�'
O5-AUG09 —�b��u t-�ctLh�/� ' For 3 oCSOtfice Ma or/ASSistant
Routing 4 ouncil Ci Council
Doa Type: RESOLUTION Order 5 i Clerk Ci Cierk
E-0oCUment Required: Y
Document Contact: Emily Goodman
ConWet Phone: 6-6551 ����i���
Totai # of Signature Pages �_ (CGp All Locatfons for Signature)
Action Requestetl: 1 �r
Approve resolution amending the Giand Avenue Special Sign District regulations. ���
����3��
Recommendations: Approve (A) or Reject (R): Personal Service Contracts Must Answer the following Questions:
A Planning Commission 1. Has this persoNfirm ever worked under a contraCt for this department?
CIB Committee Yes No '
Civil Senrice Commission 2. Has this personffirm ever been a city employee?
Yes No
3. Does this person/firm possess a skill not normally possessed by any
current cify empioyee?
Yes No
Expiain all yes answers on separete sheet and attach to green sheet.
Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why):
Summitt Hill Assn, and Grand Avenue Business Association have proposed a set of amendments to the'Grand Avenue Special Sign
Disffict reguLations to bring it up to date with current sign code language, c1eYaz up ambigious and unnecessary language, reduce th0
amount of business sign azea allowed, and prohibit signs with dynamic display.
Advantages If Approved:
The Grand Avenue Special Sign District regulations aze updated.
Disadvantages If Approved: �
None
Disadvantages If Not Approvetl:
The Grand Avenue Special Sign District regulations will not be updated.
Total Amount of
Transaction: CosURevenue Budgeted:
Funding Source: Activity Number:
Financia l Information:
(Expiain)
June 11, 2009 10:24 AM Page 1
09-83�
city of saint paui
pianning commission resolution
file number 09-39
date June 5. 20Q9
Amendments to the Grand Avenue Speciai Sign District
WHEREAS, the Grand Avenue Speciai District Sign Plan, which applies to the area defined by Oakland
Avenue on the east, Cretin Avenue on the West, and the parallei alleys north and south of Grand
Avenue, was originally adopted in 1983 and amended in 1993 and 1996 under the provisions of § 64.601
of the Zoning Code for speciaf district sign plans; and
WHEREAS, the Grand Avenue Business Association and Summit Hill Association, in 2004, proposed
additionaf amendments to the Grand Avenue Special Sign District; and
WHEREAS, § 64.601 of the Zoning Code requires that changes to special district sign plans must be
approved by City Council resolution, after review and recommendation by the Planning Commission, and
after public hearings before both the Planning Commission and the City Council; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing on the proposed amendments to the Grand Avenue Special Sign District
was conducted by the Planning Commission on April 24, 2009, notice of the hearing having been
published in compliance with Minnesota Statutes §462.357 Subd. 3 and mailed to affected property
owners on Grand Avenue and other interested parties; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, under the provisions of § 64.601 of the Zoning Code for special
sign districts, that the Pianning Commission recommends to the City Council the folfowing amendments
to the Grand Avenue Special Sign District:
Intent and Purpose
The Grand Avenue Specia{ District Sign Pfan, as provided in Section 64.601 �6.��6 ofthe Zoning Code, is
intended to provide sign controls for Grand Avenue that build on the unique character and identity of
Grand Avenue. It provides for strong, clear identification of businesses on the Avenue. 1t is intended to
reduce the clutter and chaotic diversity of signage that impairs the effectiveness of signs identifying
businesses. It is intended to provide design standards for signs to increase their legibility and impact, to
create a more desirable and memorable image for Grand Avenue, to protect property value along the
Avenue, and to reflect the pride businesses take in the area.
Area Description
The Grand Avenue Speciai District Sign Plan shali apply to the area defined by Oakland Avenue on the
east, Cretin Avenue on the west, and the parallel aileys north and south of Grand Avenue.
moved by Wenci
seconded by
in favor Unan�ous
against
09-83�
File #
Planning Commission Resofution
Page 2
Definitions and tnterpretation
The provisions of this speciai Sign District Plan do not supersedethe provisions of Chapter 64 �6 Signs, of
the Zoning Code. The provisions of this Pian are supplementary to those of the Zoning Code, and the
most restrictive provis+on shall app(y. Ail words and terms shall be defined as in Chapter 64 C6 of the
Zoning Code of the City of St. Paul.
Administration and Enforcement
The zoning administrator shali enforce the provisions of this Plan as a supplement to Chapter 64 6f Signs,
ofi the Zoning Code. Tti° ^ �f aH�� e,..,.:.,i c�,... n;�+....F o�.,., a.. ..... � ..a,. ti.+ ..
. Whenever a permit
for a sign in the Grand Avenue Special Sign District is required under the provisions of Chapter 64 f6 of
the Zoning Code, such permit shall not be issued unless the plans forthe sign have been approved by the
Zoning Administrator as in conformance with this Plan and Chapter 64 &f, Signs.
Procedures
Applicatfons for sign permits in the Grand Avenue Special Sign District shall be submitted to the Zoning
Administrator for review and approval. The Zoninp Administrator shall immediatelv notifv the approoriate
District Plannina Council. The application submitted to the Zonina Administrator shall be accompanied by
plans of sufficient detail to demonstrate that the proposed sign complies with the provisions of this Plan
and shalt inciude at least the fiollowing:
1. A front elevation (fro�t view) drawing of the sign drawn to scale. This can usually be obtained from the
sign company, an architect, or a graphic arts company. The minimum scale is one inch = 1 foot.
2. Either a front elevation drawing of the building with the proposed sign located on it (minimum scale'/<
inch = 1 foot) or a photo of the building front.
3. A specification sheet describing sign materials, exact letter size, and type of lighting.
The Zoning Administrator shall review the plans within 30 days and notify the applicant of the decision to
approve or disapprove the plans. Written reasons for denial shall accompany any decision to disapprove
the plans. Decisions by the Zoning Administrator may be appeaied to the Board of Zoninq Appeals
under the provisions of Section 61.701 of the Zoninq Code.
A fee to cover the costs of the review shall be established by resolution of the City Council.
,4dve�is++�g-S+gns
- - - -_ - - - - - - - - -
09-83�
File #
Planning Commission Resolution
Page 3
Business Signs
Business signs, signs w#ist� that identifv and direct attention to the business on the premises play an
important ro�e in informing customers about the types and iocation of businesses on Grand Avenue.
Business signs are important for the quality of Grand Avenue as a commercial street and are the signs that
should be the most visible.
Siqns that advertise a product and include the name of the business on the premises upon which the sipn
is placed shali not be oermitted, Such sipns which are often provided bv qroduct suppliers, fail to hiqhliqht
the important information, the business name and clutter the aopearance of the street.
��� �
Business signs may take the form of wall signs, '""� projecting signs, freestandinct pelesiQas�
�d signs, temporarv siqns, and aortable siqns. `^'�° ° •°s°�•°�' ". " °" ^ ^^�"^^' The
location of business signs oriented to vehicular traffic shoufd be coordinated to make them easier to find
and read. The sum of the pross surfiace displav area in sauare feet of ail business siqns on a Iot shall not
exceed one (1) times the lineal feet of lot frontaae or seventv-five (75) square feet, whichever is qreater.
Siqn materials shaA be compatible with the oricainal construction materials and architectural stvle of the
buildinq facade on or near which thev are placed. Naturai materials such as wood and metal are qenerallv
more aqpropriate than plastic.
Siqns with dvnamic displav are prohibited.
Wall Signs
Wail signs should be located on the sign bands of buifding facades overthe entry or display windows of a
business. Wall signs shall cover neither windows nor architecturai trim and detail.
Letters on wall signs shall be no more than eighteen (18) inches in height �,;:��°'"° °�°�° ^� ..,"�^� `��
. Because wali signs
are almost always seen from an angle, extended typefaces should be used. Viewing from an angle
diminishes the apparent width and spacing of the letters. Bold type with light lettering on a dark
background is recommended for maximum legibility.
«N� .. „a....,�
��:;,,w,..r
Signs more than'�•�°^�9; thirtv (3p) feet above the ground are out of the viewer's normal vision range
and are of little value. The highest point on a wall sign shall be no more than �•�..�^��; thiR 30 feet
above grade.
04-833.
�ife #
Planning Commission Resolution
Page 4
�$
Projecting Signs
A projecting sign is a sign other than a wall sign which projects from and is supported by a wali or a
building or structure.
. ProJecting symbolic or business name signs are permitted.
hevnn � � 44.r�.. n ..1 A�Ha...nA in'i M h'nHlinh4 iL.c L.
. Care should be exercised in mounting so that signs are generally in the
same height zone for ease in spotting but do not block each other out. A projecting sign shali not be
located below a wall sign if it would obstruct the view of the wall sign.
Proiectinp signs shail have a maximum gross surface dispiay area of
*••^:..�7 sixteen (16) square feet ep r side. The highest point on a projecting sign shall be no more than
iwe�4y-E28� thirtv (30) feet above grade.
Freestandinq ReJe Signs
s+�°°' -'^� �:�> There shall be no more than one freestandina �ele sign per #ek�{48}-feeE lot +s
a44ewed and a freestandinq siqn shali be a minimum distance of fortV (40) feet from anv other
freestandinq si4n. Freestandinq Pele signs shall be set back at
least five /5) feet from all propertv lines and have a maximum gross surface display area of twentv four
j241 fi���:.,��� square feet per side. The highest point on a freestanding {�ele sign shall be no more
than twenty (20) feet above grade; if located within a reauired vard, it shall be �o more than eiqht (81
feet above carade. Freestandinq Rele signs shall be stationary (may not revolve) and have as littie
structure as possibie. Siqn illumination should be done in such a wav that liqht spillover on adiacent
properties is minimized.
�.....�se...�:.... c:....�
�• ' - - ' - - - - --
09-83�
File #
Planning Commission Resoiution
Page 5
Window Signs
pen yaf�m .�n4`r' �. � ..rl en.�icn�i.. � 1... .. a' T ...l�__ � R,_�
�.. �.':�.. .,..�.�., � �...i.v...,.�.�...�w ...�. �r�., �v .
Window signs includinq temporarv window siqns. should not exceed 30% of the store window glass area.
The lettering of the business name should not exceed twelve (12) si* inches in height. The lettering for
other information should not exceed one inch in height �°*°•° ,.,-+" h� ^ti« ,.,.�,.. ,.. ,...�a ...e Fh� „,,,�«
c�i4�le� u.hmMve.4h.. iinh4'rnr� r.r�.�diPr� e:.l ...J .. {'rl
�._._ ....�__. _. _.._ ..�.._..� '_.._..._.._ _.._ ..._.__ �..._ ��...........
Temporary window signs add to visual clutter and should be used only to advertise the aropertV for sale.
rent, or {ease, or for specific short-term sales for no more than three (3) nonconsecutive times oer calendar
year for a period of not more than thirtv (30) davs per time. Old paper signs are easily associated with
"going out of business' sales. ,
Temnorarv Siaas
Portable Siqns
[moved]
RFecedtFFes [moved]
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission directs the Planning Administrator to
forward the amendments to the Grand Avenue Special Sign District, other appropriate documentation,
and this resolution, to the Mayor and City Council for their review and adoption.
shall be a maximum of twentv-four i24) square feet.
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNMG &
ECONOM[C DEVELOPMENT
Cecile Bedor, Oirecior
crrY oF sa�vr raur.
Chrutopher B. Coleman, Mayor
Date:
To:
From:
May 27, 2009
Planning Commission
Neighborhood Planning Committee
25 Wesr Founh Stree[
Sarrst Pmel, hfN 55102
09-8�
Telephone: 651-266-6565
Facsrmde: 651-228-3261
Subjec4: Public hearing testimony on the Grand Avenue Special Sign District Amendments
Background
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Grand Avenue Special Sign District Amendments
on April 24, 2009. Five people spoke offering their comments on the amendments. In addition, one letter
was received expressing general support in addition to specific critique.
This memo summarizes the issues raised and presents Committee comments/recommendations to the
full Planning Commission.
Overview of public hearing testimony
The testimony focused o� several issues: the economy, dynamic display signs, and portable signs.
1. Economy.
Testimonv. Chad Kulas (St. Paul Area Chamber of Commerce) expressed concern that the City
increase regulations on businesses during an economic downtown. Additionally, he was skeptical
that given the reduction of DSI staffi, the City would be able to enforce the proposed amendments.
Comment. These were general comments that did not include any recommendations for specific
changes to the proposed amendments.
2. Dynamic display signs.
Testimonv. John Wulf (general manager for Dixie's and Sajia Ya) would like dynamic display signs to
be aliowed on Grand Avenue as a clean and affprdable alternative to signs that would otherwise
clutter the avenue.
Comment Both SHA and GABA recommended that signs with dynamic display shouid be prohibited
on Grand Avenue.
Committee Recommendatio�. No change to the draft amendments.
3. Portable signs.
TestimonV. John Wulf (General manager for Dixie's and Sajia Ya), Jeff Roy (Summit Hill
Association), and David Regan (Grand Avenue Business Association) expressed concerns about the
proposed language regarding portable signs. Mr. Wulfi woufd like to be able to use portable signs to
advertise valet parking for his restaurants. Mr. Roy and Mr, Regan propose that businesses without a
business door on Grand Avenue be allowed to have portable signs on the sidewafk. Both Mr. Roy
AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
09-83i
and Mr. Regan suggest that some language Qermitting the use of a Memorandum of Understanding
(a la Moscow on the Hii!) be inc{uded in the proposed amendments. Mr. Roy said it was not their
intent to prohibit portable signs on private property.
Comments. §§ 64.401(i) and 64.503(c)(3) of Chapter 64, Signs, of the Zoning Code prohibit portabie
business signs from being located +n the public right-of-way, including the public sidewalk. Use of
pubiic righi-of-way is also regulated by Chapters 106, 1'16, and '135 of the City Legislative Code,
which are not part of the Zoning Code. § 106.01 prohibits obstruction of public sidewalks by any
materiai whatever, but makes specific exceptions for sidewalk cafes and sidewalk sales subject to a
number of conditions, notification and approvai requirements.
§ 64.601, Speciai district sign plan, of Chapter 64, Signs, provides that special sign districts may have
"less restrictive as well as more restrictive provisions than specified in this chapter. .. if the signs
and densities for the plan as a whofe are in conformity with the intent of this chapter and if such
exception results in an improved relationship between the various paris of the plan." Special sign
districts may not, however, create an exception to provisions in other chapters of the code, including
Chapters 106, 116, and 135 that regulate use of public right-of-way including public sidewalks. In
order to allow portable business signs in the public right-of-way, there would also need to be an
amendment to Chapter 106 similar to the sidewafk cafe exemption in § 1�6.01(b).
The signs and densities for the Grand Avenue Special District Sign Plan as a whole are in conformity
wiih the intent of Chapter 64, signs. However, it is not clear that an exception to allow portable
business signs on public sidewalks would "result in an improved relationship between the various
parts of the plan." If it does, and if Chapter 106 is amended to provide an exemption for poRable
business signs in the public right-of-way, there could be a second paragraph added under "Portable
Siqns in the Grand Avenue Special District Sign Plan as follows:
Subject to the provisions and restrictions of Section 106.01, a portakle business sign may be
located on a limited part of the public sidewalk or boulevard that immediately adjoins the
premises of the business.
The Moscow on the Hill Memorandum of Understanding referred to in the testimony pertains to a two
vehicle, on-street valet parking zone on Friday and Saturday evenings from 6:Q0 to 9:00 p.m. that
includes a provision that a temporary sign "of a type and at a location agreeable to the Traffic
Engineer can be placed near the curb to notify any customer of the valet service." It provides for
insurance naming the City as additional insured, and provides that provides that the Traffic Engi�eer
can revise or revoke the agreement as necessary.
Committee Recommendation. Amend the proposed new section on portabie signs as follows:
Portable Siqns
2
signs shall be no more than forty-two (42) inches in height, and shall be regulatea accoraing to
the requirements for portable signs in the TN1-TN3 Traditional Neighborhood and OS-61
Business Districts in Section 64.503(c) of the Zoning Code, with the exception that the total gross
surface disQlay area of portable signs on a zoning lot shall not exceed thirty-six (36) square feet.
09-83�
Saint Paul Planning Commission
City Hail Conference Center
15 Kellogg Soulevard West
Minutes Apri124, 2009
A mee[ing of the Planning Commission of the City of Saint Paul was held Friday, April 24, 2009, at
8:30 a.m. in the Conference Center of City Hall.
Commissioners
Present:
Commissioners
Absent:
Mmes. Donnelly-Cohen, Faricy, Morton, Porter, Smitten, Thao, Wencl; and
Messrs. Alcon, Bellus, Commers, Gordon, 7ohnson, Kramer, Margulies,
Schertler, Spaulding and Wazd.
Ms. *Lu and Messrs. *Barrera, *Good3ow, *Nelson.
*Excused
Also Present: Donna Drummond, Interim Planning Adminisvator; Peter Warner, City
Attorney's Office; Tom Beach, Department of Safety and Inspections staff; Allan
Torstenson, Pa[ricia James, Penelope Simison, Merritt Clapp-Smith, Luis Pereira,
Kate Reilly, El1en Muller, Josh Williams, Emi1y Goodman and Sonja But]er,
Department of Planning and Economic Aevelopment staff.
I. Approval of minutes April 10, 2009.
MOTION: Commissioner ponnelly-Cohen approval of the minutes of March T3, 2009.
Commissioner Wencl seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously on a voice vote.
TI.
III.
-�sC IV
Chair's Announcements
Chair Alton announced that a reminder sheet was distributed to the commissioners about the
Great River Gathering Dinner on May 74, 2009 and asked commissioners to complete the form if
attending.
Planning Administrator's Announcements
Donna Drummond reported on planning-related business at the Ciry Council saying that on
Wednesday there was final adopdon of an ordinance related to the regulapon of asphalt cement
and asphalc cement manufac[uring plants, This was a zoning study that went through the
Planning Commission.
PUBLIC HEARING: Grand Avenue Special Sien District — Item from the Neighborhood
Planning Committee. (Emily Goodman., 651/266-6551)
Chair Alton announced that the Saint Paul Planning Commission was holding a public hearing on
the Grand Avenue Special Sign District. Notice of the public hearing was published in the i,egal
Ledger on April 2, 2009, and was mailed to the citywide Early Notification System list and other
09-83�
interested parties.
Emily Goodman, PED staff, gave a presentation on the proposed Grand Avenue Special Sign
District Amendments. She presented information on the background of the proposed
amendments, general nature of the changes, and described the proposed substandve changes.
Ms. Csoodman received one letter from the Summit Hi11 Association expressing their general
support and az2iculaung their specific concerns.
Chair Alton read the rules of procedure for the public hearing.
The foilowing people spoke.
1. Mr. David Baker, 2922 Meadow Brook Dr., Woodbury, MN 55125. He is chair of the
Business Review Council (BRC) for the City of Saint PauL They are an advisory group that
includes representatives of residents, businesses, and labor. Mr. Baker said that he does not
have a lo[ of comments regazding the Grand Avenue amendments at this time, but will testify
at the public hearing on digital signage. The BRC is going to review the proposed Grand
Avenue amendments at an upcoming meeting and will submit its recommendations to the
City Council.
2. Chad Kulas, St. Pau] Area Chamber of Commerce, 40l Robert Sveet, Ste. 150, St. Paul, MN
55101. Mr. Kulas said that [he Chamber enjoys the unique chazm Grand Avenue has [o offer
and believes there can be a happy medium of restricting certain types of signs but allowing
advertising that fits the look of the neighborhood. Mr. Kulas believes that the current
guide]ines have enabled the Avenue to be beautiful and does not see a need to change them.
He also poinied out that given [he economic downturn, it may not be prudent to resuict the
ways in which businesses can self-promote. Moreover, because the downturn is impacting
the number of enforcement staff at the Department of Safety and Inspeccions, Mr. Kulas
questioned the City's ability to enforce the new ordioance.
John Wulf, 695 Grand Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55105. He is the general manager for Dixie's
and Saji Ya on Cttand Avenue, and former president of the Grand Avenue Business
Associauon in 2000. Mr. Wulf said that some of the [hings (e.g., sandwich boazds and
portable signs, etc J that aze in this proposal will affect his businesses. He uses a sandwich
board to advertise valet parking. He believes this is a safety issue, as it helps ro take cazs off
the street and to attempt to do so by placing staff in the street to flag down potential
customers is dangerous. Sandwich boazds and portable signs aze a way [o get the pedestrian
traffic ioto the businesses. Also, Mr. Wulf believes that a dynamic display sign in the
window is a clean and affordable altemative to signs that would otherwise clutter the avenue.
4. Jeff Roy, Executive Director of the Summit Hill Association. A]etter from the Summit Hill
Association had been disuibuted to the commissioners and Mr. Roy referred to that letter.
They feel that there needs to he increased restriction on signage size etc., so that Grand
Avenue does not become infested with signs, but keeps its charm. He specifically spoke to
one point in the Ietter regarding portable signs, reading: "Unfortunately we note on further
review that the partion of the text revising the portable sign secUOn is not in agreement with
the original intent of the October 2004 posipon of the Summit Hill Associauo� and the Grand
Avenue Business Associauon. Our posiuon at that time (and now) on the issue of portable
09-83�
signs is that if a business is in a building with a facing on Grand Avenue and was up to'/z
b]ock north or south of the avenue without a business door opening up [o Grand Avenue, then
an unlit, portab]e sign could be placed on the sidewalk right of way, if it did not impede
pedestrian traffic. In addition, the Grand Avenue Special Sign Plan shouid not regulate
portable signs on private property; as long as the [o[al squaze foot restricvons of signage per
lot were no[ exceeded. Our understanding from PED is that under Chap. 64.601 (b), the
Grand Avenue Special Sign Plan could be less restrictive than current citywide code on
portable signs. With this in mind, we suggest that some mechanism be set up (i.e. a Memo of
Understanding or MOU) allowing a business without a door on Grand to enter into an
agreement with the City to allow them to have one, due to their special conditions. Further,
since we understand that there exists a MOU 6etween the restaurant Moscow on the Hill
(located on Selby Avenue) and the City allowing this restaurant and its valet service to have a
portable sign on the public right of way; we propose that the tex[ of [he Grand Avenue
Special Sign Plan inc]ude provision for a business on Grand to be able to se[ up a MOU with
the City for valet service pazking that would allow a portable sign to be placed on the public
sidewalk."
Commissioner Gordon asked if the Summit Hill Association has considered the possibiliry of
portable signs going up on a pole outside the business, rather then sitting on the sidewalk.
One of the issues is interference with [he public right-of-way if a sign is put oo the sidewalk.
Rather then sit[ing on the sidewalk, the signs could 6e placed on a pole in order to remove
them from the sidewalk and increase visibility.
Mr. Wulf`s response was that the original understanding they had pu[ into their tevision in
2004 was that a sign cannot be placed in more then 1/3 of the sidewalk so that it would not
block pedestrian traf£ic. In terms of effectiveness of Commissioner Gordon's aI[emative, he
has no opinion.
Commissioner Kramer was concemed that the testimony was focusing on whether signs
should be allowed in the right-of-way, something that is outside the scope of the ordinance.
He also reques[ed staff clarification on whe[her the ordinance could allow signs in the public
right-of-way.
Ms. Goodman read the actual text which says "except for advertising signs for which the
restrictions of this chapter shall not be weakened, less restricdve, as well as more restticdve
previsions, as specified in this chaptei may be permitted if the sign areas and densides for the
plan as a whole are in conformity with the intent of this chap[er and if such an exception
tesults in an improved relationship be[ween the vazious garts of the ptan." Based on this, it is
s[aff s opinion tha[ [here could be language allowing signs to be in the right-of-way along
Grand Avenue, if it was the opinion of the approving body that those vazious condidons were
met.
5. David Regan, 867 Grand Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55105. Mr. Regan is the executive director
of the Grand Avenue Business Association (GABA). This project has gone on for a long
[ime, and GABA and its executive committee fee] like they aze prepazed to move forwazd on
this They have taken information from their consiituents on this issue and they came back to
the portable sign issue, which is illegal across the city. Mr. Regan said that they do want [o
encourage the massaging of [he language azound the MOUs for the vale[ pazking. The
businesses that aze on Grand Avenue and do not have a door on the Avenue, and the current
09-833-
conditions on the Avenue generatly where you see portable signage is where there is a mall
situauon (such az at Grand and Victoria). Mr. Regan said the unique thing about Grand
Avenue is that all of the sidewalks are wide and aze connected to a boulevazd. All of the
signs sit in the boulevazd area which makes foot uaffic cleaz so he does not see any signs in
the sidewalk.
MOTION: Commissioner Wencl moved to close the pubZic hearing, Zeave the record open for
written testimony un1i14:3D p.m. on Monday, Apri127, 2009, and to refer the matter back to the
Neighborhond Planning Committee for review and recomtnendation. Commissioner Ward
seconded the motion. The mokon camied unanimously on a voice vote.
Signs with Dvnamic Display Ordioance — T[em from the Neighborhood Planning Committee.
(Emily Coodman., 651l266-6>SI )
Chair Alton announced that the Saint Pau] Planning CommissSon is holding a public hearing on
the Signs with Dynamic Display Ordinance. Notice of the public hearing was published in the
Lega] Ledger on April 2, 2009, and was mailed to the citywide Early Notification System ]ist and
otherinterested parties.
Emily Goodman, PED scaff, gave a presentation on the proposed Signs with Dynamic Display
Ordinance. She presented informauon on the background and rational for the proposed ordinance
and the substantive changes.
Commissioner Schertler said that there aze four important issues here. One is the foundation of
regulatory authority and the studies tha[ justify reguladon. What are those studies as ihey relate
to safety?
Ms. Goodman said that the results of tbe studies are very closely linked wich who funded the
sCUdy. So if a study was funded by representatives from the sign industry; the studies indicate
that there are not issues with safery. But if the study is not from the sign industry, then study
results indicate electronic signs are a hazard to safety, it is simply another one of those hazards
that drivers experience. If we treat all studies equally, they aze a wash. There is a study coming
out later this year that's funded by Federal Transportation Administration.
Commissioner Schertler had a question as to faimess. He said the reguladons appear to be
selecting certain entities to al]ow far providing information (e.g, Metro Transit, bank time,
hockey team, etcJ. Has someone from the City Attomey's Office given their lega] opinion on
this?
Ms. Goodman answered saying the idea of accepting things that are considered to be public
services, such as time and tempetature and public transi[ information is a standazd practice, but
[he city atwrney has not given their opinion whether that is legally sound or not.
Commissioner Mazgulies asked what differences exist between this proposed ordinance and
oxdinances that othex cipes have adopted, inGuiring of staff what might be missing from this one.
Ms. Goodman answered saying that the greatest difference is that many communities choose to
ban dynamic disp]ay signs outrigbt. Stricter restrictions with regard to length of display, color,
scrol]ing, and speed of cransition are also common.
09-83�
Hill Association
Aprii 22, 2009
District 16 Planning Gouncil
860 Sainf Cfair Avenue
Sairrt Paul, Minnesota 55105
Teiephone 651-222-1222
Fax 651-222-1558
www. s umm ithil iassociati�n.o rg
e-maif: summithill�visi.com
Emily Goodman
St. Paul Planning Cammission
14d0 Cit�y Hall flnnex
25 �J. 4 SY. :
St. Paul; _MN 55102 ; � � �� . �. � � � �
Dear Ms Goodman and St. Paul Planning Commission Members,
On behalf of ihe Execurive Committee of the Sumniit Hill AssociationlDistrict 16 Planning
Councii, we would like to express our concerns and reiterate our position regarding the
prohibition of portable business signs on Grand Avenue inciuded in ihe draft
Neighborl�ood Committee rev3sions to the Grand Avenue Special Sign Pian under review;
and as pez Chap, 64.503 (c) (3) of 5t. Pau] Zoning Code.
Starting in late suxnmer 2008, representatives of the Summit Hill Associazion (SHA), the
Grand Avenue BusinesS Association (GABA) and Macalester Groveland Community
Couneil began meeting with PED stai�' members Allan Tarstensan and Bmily Goodman to
discuss praposed revisions, orzgit�ally submitted to the city in October 2004, to the;�irand
Avenue �pecial Sign Plan. The 2004 xevisiona had been snPamitted by 5H.A and GABA,
but not fiilly reViewed or acted upon at that rime by PED. .�11'parties were very glad to
finally begin moving this pzacess of plan revision forward last year.
Tlirough several meetings in 2008 until early 2009, we were able to.make grsat progress
and find consensus among all parties regazding the best language for revising the Gtand
Avenue Speciai �ign Plan. The revisions would brin*.it up to date,with current code, and
provide guidelines for, aniong ottter tliings, reducing visuaS clutter and codi£ying the_ fype,
size, total squat'e footage and placement of sign along Grand Avenue. Af fhe `same
time, we sought to strike a balance to meet the needs of both Grand Avenue businesses and
the broader neighborhood.
Unforiwiately, we note on fiu�ther xeview that the portion af the text revi'sing the poxtable .
sign section is not in agreement with the original intent of the October 2Q44 position of
SHA. and GABA. Our position at that time (and now) on the issue of portable signs is that
if a business is in a building with a facing on Grand Avenue and was up to 'I= block north
or souYh of the avenue without a business door opening up to Grand Avenue, then au unlit,
portable sign could be placed on the sidewalk right of way, if it did not impede pedestrian
traffia ln addition, the C'srand Avenue Special Sigz Plan shoulfl not reguiate portable signs
on private property; as Iong as the total square. foot restrictions of signage per lot were not
exceeded.
Onrunderstancling from P�D staff is that under Chap.:64:&OT (b), ttie Grand Avenue
3peEial Sign Plan could be less Xestrictive than current citywiile code on portable signs.
09-83�
With this in mind, we suggest that some mechanism be set up (i.e. a Memo of
Uuderstandingj allowing a business without a door on Csrand to enter into an agreement
v,*it� ihe city.to ailaw tk�em to have one, due to tIieir special conditions. Further, since we
understand that there exists a Memo of Understanding (MOTJ) between the restaurant
Moscow ou the T-iill (located on Selby Avenue) and the City allowing this restaurant and its
valet service to have a portable sign on the gublic right of way; we propose that fhe text of
the Grand Avenue Special Sign Plan include provision for a business on Grand to be able
to set up an MOiJ with the city for valei service pazking that would allow a portable sign to
be piaced�on tlie public sidewalk.
Therefore; the;Executive:Eommiffee ofthe SammitHill-Association strongly requests that
- the Plauning Conunission keep fhese, cozn�iients in inind;when teviewiug and making :'
iecammendztrons on iev'isittg to Girand tivenue Special Sign Plan:
Sincerely,
� ��
Ti�� PTesi ent
Y.
Summit I-Till AssociationJDistri�t 16 Planning Council
09-83�
Proposed Amendments to the Grand Avenue Special District Sign Plan
March 2, 2009
Intent and Purpose
The Grand Avenue Special District Sign Plan, as provided in Section 64.601 FFr.2�-� of the
Zoning Code, is intended to provide sign controls for Grand Avenue that build on the unique
character and identity of Grand Avenue. It provides for strong, cleaz identification of businesses
on the Avenue. It is intended to reduce the ciutter and chaotic diversity of signage that impairs
the effectiveness of signs identifying businesses. It is intended to provide design standards for
sib s to increase their legibility and impact, to create a more desirable and memorable image for
Grand Avenue, to protect property value along the Avenue, and to reflect the pride businesses
take in the azea.
Area Description
The Grand Avenue Special District Sign Plan shall apply to the area defined by Oakland Avenue
on the east, Cretin Avenue on the west, and the pazallel alleys north and south of Grand Avenue.
Definitions and Interpretation
The provisions of this special Sign District Pian do not supersede the provisions of Chapter 64 Fi6
Signs, of the Zoning Code. The provisions of this Plan are supplementary to those of the Zoning
Code, and the most restrictive provision shall apply. All words and terms sha11 be defined as in
Chapter 64 bFi of the Zoning Code of the City of St. Paul.
Administration and Enforcement
The zoning administrator shall enforce the provisions of this Plan as a supplement to Chapter 64
F6 Signs, of the Zoning Code. T'-° ~ ^F *,.:� c„,,,.:.,� e:,.., r.:.....;,., n�.,., a,. .,�,
> > ;
r'"'� Whenever a permit for a sign in the Grand Avenue Special Sign District is required
under the provisions of Chapter 64 t 6 of the Zoning Code, such permit shall not be issued unless
the plans for the sign have been approved by the Zoning Administrator as in conformance with
this Plan and Chapter 64 F6, Signs.
The Zonin� Administrator may order the removal of any sig,n that is not constnxcted or
maintained in accordance with the provisions of this Special District Sien Plan under the
provisions of Section 64.206(d) of the Zonin� Code. Violations of this Special District Si n� Plan
are subject to the enforcement provisions of Chapter 61, Article IX, 61.900, Enforcement, of the
Zoning Code.
[Move this section here from the end of the document to make this more prominent, dear, and consistent with the
organization of the Zoning code generally. The struck sentence simply cepeats the previous paragaph and is
unnecessary.
Recommendations by the Summit Hill Association (SHA) and the Grand Avenue Business Association (GABA) in
2004 for amendments to the Grand Avenue Special District Sign Plan included a recommendation for some
additional language about enforcement and removal of non-complying signs in the "Procedures" section. This is the
right place for the additional language. The additional language recommended by SHA and GABA called for
enforcement by "the appropriate District Planning Council." However, these regulations must legally be
administered and enforced by the City Zoning Administrator, and any appeal of administrative action must be an
appeal of a Zoning Administrator order, requirement or decision. The DisRict Counci] may advise the Zoning
' � •
� �
Administrator in writing of noncompliance and send a copy of the letter to the business owner as they
recommended, but ]anguage in this Plan that the District P]anning Counci] will do so is unnecessary and would be
inappropriate. 7'he Zoning Administrator must be able to initiate enforcement action independent of the District
Council, and any enforcement action must 3egally begin with the Zoning Administrator.]
Procedures
Applications for sign pertnits in the Grand Avenue Special Sign District shall be submitted to the
Zoning Administrator for review and approval. The Zonina Administrator shall immediately
notifv the appropriate District Plannin� Council. The application submitted to the Zonin�
Admuustrator shall be accompanied by plans of sufficient detail to demonstrate that the proposed
sign complies with the provisions of this Plan and shall include at least the following:
1. A front elevation (front view) drawing of the sign drawn to scale. This can usually be
obtained from the sign company, an architect, or a graphic arts company. The minimum scale is
one inch = 1 foot.
2. Either a front elevation drawing of the building witt� the proposed sign located on it
(minimum scale '/< inch = 1 foot) or a photo of the building front.
3. A speci$cation sheet describing sign materials, exact letter size, and type of lighting.
The Zoning Administrator shail review the plans within 30 days and notify the applicant of the
decision to approve or disapprove the plans. Written reasons for denial shall accompany any
decision to disapprove the plans. Decisions by the Zoning Administrator may be appealed to the
Board of Zonin� Appeals °'°^~:~� �'�~�~,:°^:^~ under the nrovisions of Section 61.701 of the
Zonin� Code.
A fee to cover the costs of the review shall be established by resolution of the City Council.
[Move this section here from the end of the document to make it more prominent and consistent with the
organization of the Zoning Code generally. Added sentence about concurrent submission of sign permit
applications to the district council for review recommended by SHA and GABA. Added also to submit to GABA in
order to fwther the intent of SHA and GABA recommendation, with a review period limited to 5 business days so as
❑ot to tie up the permiC process.]
A.a.......a:�:.... C:....�
��
� 9
b
• a
e
e
[A primary goal stated by the Summit Hill Association for changes to the Grand Avenue Specia! District Sign Plan
recommended by SHA and GABA in 2004 is to clear up ambiguous and unnecessary language.
Prohibition of advertising si�s was one of the most significant provisions of the Grand Avenue Special District
Sign Plan when it was adopted in 1983, and thus it was written as the first substantive provision of the plan. It was
the first time in St. Paul that advertising signs were prohibited in a B2 or B3 disrrict. Now, under § 64.420 of the
Zoning Code, advertising signs aze prohibited in all zoning districts city-wide. Therefore, this provision in the
Grand Avenue Special District Sign Plan to prohibit advertising signs no longer has any significance, is
unnecessary, and should be deleted.
The language regarding provisions for legal nonconforming sigps in this paragaph is also redundant, unnecessary,
and should be deleted. The Grand Avenue Special District Sign Plan is a supplement to Chapter 64, Signs, of the
I' : �
Zoning Code and the detailed provisions and regulations for legal nonconforming signs in § 64301 apply to the
Grand Avenue Special District Sign Plan. They shouid not be replicated here.]
c' t.',.L. .,,7. .w:.. ..a,...a .,.] ..i...io fl.o ..f rl,o�.,� ti,e
. �
1' C '1 �.� 1.:..t,l:..l.+ t4.e .....w....a :..F «....,t:..«. tl.o _4.�.c_:ro �...7 ,.l..tr.,« �l,e
� c c m r =
° ^{*''° ^'-^°'. [Moved to "Business Signs" paragraph below.]
Business Signs
Business signs, sia s�k�c� that identifv and direct attention to the business on the premises play
an important role in informing customers about the types and location of businesses on Grand
Avenue. Business signs are important for the quality of Grand Avenue as a commercial street
and are the signs that should be the most visible.
3ians that advertise a product and include the name of the basiness on the premises unon which
the sign is placed shall not be permitted Such si�ns which aze often provided by_product
s�pliers fail to highliaht the important information the business name, and clutter the
3ppearance of the Street. [Moved here from "Advertising Signs" pazagraph above.]
�
�
I 1, 1,7 1.. '1�1,. '�t, ti,,. 1...:1,7i «,7 .,.li + T -
e '
� 11 '.1 ,..7. :...,7;«0,.4 ..«.7 ....1..7..0.] l;..l.+;.... i co�.�,�u�
� v o o c r
[Deletion recommended by SHA and GABA. Sentence pertaining to sign compatibility with the bui]ding is moved
2 pazagraphs below, with additional detail recommended by SHA and GABA.]
Business signs may take the form of wall signs, .�"� projecting signs, freestandin� gele
�e ������.� signs temporarv signs, and oortable si�ns. "'�" ° �°F ~°a '�^' °" °_°
t�EEec� The location of business signs oriented to vehicular traffic should be coordinated to
make them easier to find and read. The sum of the g,ross surface displav area in square feet of all
bus iness si ¢ns on a lot shall not exceed one (1) times the lineal feet of lot frontage or sevent�v-
five {75) sc�are feet whichever is reater.
[Delete roof signs because they are now prohibited in all zoning districts by § 64.414 in Chapter 64, Signs, of the
Zoning Code. The Grand Avenue Special District Sign Plan is a supplement to Chapter 64, Signs, and the most
restrictive provision applies.
The other proposed changes to this paragraph, recommended by SHA and GABA in 2004, reduce the amount of
business sign area allowed in BC, B2 and B3 Business Districts on Grand Avenue from "two (2) times the IineaL feet
of frontage or 75 sq. feeY' to "one (1) times the lineal feet of lot frontage or 75 sq. feet ° The proposed "one (1)
times the lineal front footage" standard is the same as for TN Traditiona] Neighborhood and OS-B1 Business
Distxicts.
In addition, changes to this paragraph recommended by SHA and GABA would include window signs, temporary
signs, and portable signs in the calcu]ation of total business sign area, further reducing the amount of business sign
azea allowed. A temporary "SALE" sign, for example, would be counted as part of the total gross surface display
azea of business signs allowed. In many cases the effect of this will be not to allow temporary and portable signs
because signs already existing under the current "two (2) times the linea! front footage" standard will exceed the
new "one (1) times the ]ineal front footage" standard. Temporary signs that are not "business signs" as defined in
Chapter 64 of the Zoning Code, such as real estate signs and sig�s of contractors working on a building, would not
be counted in the calculation of total business sign area.
09-83�-
The SHAfGABA recommendation in 2004 to include window signs in the calculation of total business sign area is
not included in the paragraph above because, under language in § 64.401, regulations in Chapter 64, Signs, of the
Zoning Code apply to "all ex[erior signs visible to the general public from a puhtic right-of-way ° Special district
sign pians aze adopted as supp3emenu to Chapter 64, Signs, under the provisions in § 64.601, and cannot be used to
regulate things to which Chapter 64 does not apply. The regulations do not apply to interior signs, including signs
on the inside of windows, and permits aze not required for interior signs. "Portoble sign" and "temporary sign" are
defined in Chapter 64; "window sign" is not. The only reference to window signs in Chapter b4 are specific
statements in § 64.5o3(b)(5) and § 64.504(b)(5) that "temporary signs ... placed inside of the window of a building
are permitted."}
Si�n materials sha11 be compatible with the original construction materials and architectural stvle
of the buildin� facade on or near which the�are placed Natural materials such as wood and
metzl are �enerall�more ap�ropriate than plastic.
[This standard, recommended by SHA and GABA, is the same as for 1N Traditional Neighborhood and OS-B1
Business Districu. SHA and GABA also recommended referencing the standards in § 64.40](0) and (p) of the
Zoning Code here. However, § 64.401 applies generally in all zoning district in the entire city, and repeating it here
is unnecessary. Unnecessary repetition makes the plan longer and hazder to read, and should general3y be avoided.
SHA and GABA's 2004 recommendations also included adding the following text here: "No sign shall project
higher than the roof line of the building except as set forth in the section below titled wall signs." This language is
unnecessary, would be inconsistent with language in the "Definitions and Interpretation" paragraph above that "the
provisions of this Plan are supplementary to those of [he Zoning Code, and the most restrictive provision shall
apply," and could create confusion. A 2007 amendment to Chapter 64 prohibits roof signs city-wide. Roof sign is
defined as "a sigi erected upon or above a roof or parapet of a building or structure." Any sign that projects above
tha roof or parapet of a building would meet this definition and is prohibited by § 64.414 of the Zoning Code.
Basing sign height on the "roof ldne, " which is not defined in the Zoning Code, could be ambiguaus m some cases.
For buildings with pazapets, it might he hazd to determine where the roof line is. In some cases, the sign band of a
building facade over the entry or display windows might extend above a roof line, and not allowing signs above the
roof line might not a]low signs on sign bands as recommended in the next pazagraph. Existing Zoning Code
language allows wall signs on a sign band on a pazapet.�
Si�ns with dynamic display are vrohibited.
Wail Signs
Wall signs should be located on the sign bands of building facades over the entry or display
windows of a business. Wall signs shall cover neither windows nor architectural trim and detail.
[SHA and GABA's 20Q4 recommendations included referencing § 64.503(a)(4) here. § 64.503(a)(A) states, "Sign
materials shall be wmpatib]e with the original construction materials and architectural style of the building facade
on or neaz which they are placed. Natura] materials such as wood and meta] aze general3y more appropriate than
plastic" This text is included in its entirety one paragraph above and should not be repeated here.
SHA and GABA's 2004 recommendations also included adding the following text here: "Wall signs shall not
extend above roof lines more than twenty-four (24) inches, for no more than 30% of the ]ength of the facade." A
2007 amendment to Chapter 64 prohiUits roof signs city-wide. Roof sign is defined as "a sigi erected upon or above
a roof or pazapet of a building or structure." A wall sign that extends above a roof or pazapet would also meet the
definition of roof sign and is prohibited by § 64.414 of the Zoning Code. § 64.60] of the Zoning Code allows
Special District Sign Plans to be less restrictive as well as more restrictive than Chapter 64, Signs, of the Zoning
Code (except for advertising signs for which the restrictions of Chapter 64 can not be weakened). If the Grand
Avenue Special District Sign Plan is amended to allow wall signs to extend above a roof or parapet up to 24 inches
for 30% of the length of the facade, language in the Definitions and Interpretation" paragraph that "the provisions
of this Plan aze supplementary to those of the Zoning Code, and the most restrictive provision shall apply" would
also need to be amended to avoid am6iguity and confusion.]
Letters on wall signs shail be no more than eighteen (18) inches in height �~'°°°''�� °��'` �' �"
. , , •
i , .
Because wall si�s are aimosi always seen from an angle, extended typefaces should be used.
Viewing from an angle diminishes the apparent width and spacing of the letters. Bold type with
light lettering on a dark backgronnd is recommended for maximum legibility.
[Deietion recommended by SHA and GABA.]
a c,.�. ,.a.i _:i...,, eao�,-.:., �r,R, a��z2w„ ..c.,.
J � Y� J r /��a r
�a �, r«w,. ,.�..,.,. w,..., e,,.. .�.o ..,:,,a,...>.. [Deletion recommended by SHA and GABA.]
--- -r_-' -•- _
Signs more than �� �~� thiriY (30) feet above the ground aze out of the viewer's normal
vision range and aze of little value. The highest point on a wall sign shall be no more than
fiueat3�{2-9} thirtv (301 feet above grade.
[Change from 20 ft. to 30 ft. recommended by SHA and GABA. Their 2004 recommendations also included
language here that wall signs "cannot extend over the roof line except as set forth in the first paragraph of this
section." With the 2007 amendment to Chapter 64 that does not allow any sign to extend above the roof or pazapet
of a building, adding this language here is unnecessary.)
�iee€�i�ss
. ,
>
..,,w,,.. :., wo:,.w�
�� [§ 64.414 of the Zoning Code now prohibiu roof signs city-wide.]
Projecting Signs
A projecting sign is a sign other than a wa11 sign which projects from and is supported by a wal]
or a building or structure. p b '�~" ""'+:..° ^"''"'" .°'':^.,'" ""i"°d°�r` '"'""F`"'
� 'a �^ ,.,,_a �.,,��'�; ,.�a ,�-*":^ � -.-___________ ^_°1°"_°"`^'o [Deletion recommended by SHA and
GABA.] Projecting symbolic or business name signs are permitted. ° r�����T"`wni�:
vca.�
..i , .,,,,_ ,.,,a a,,:i .,. �.:,,wi;,�i...i.o w,.�:,,o�� ,t� •
[The section titled `Business Signs" above includes the following language: "Signs that advertise a product and
include the name of the business on the premises upon which the sign is placed shall not be permitted. Such signs,
which ara ofren provided by product suppliers, fail to highlight the important information, the business name, and
clutter the appearance ofthe sheet" The same language here is repetitious and unnecessary, and should be deleted.]
There shall be a minimum of thirty (301 feet of lot frontage ner projectin�si�?n. and a projecting
ai¢n shall be a minimum distance of thirt�301 feet from any other projectin� sien. ��-:o-.n�
+ w ���:�,. � - F µ•. �^ n` r^"^* ; z"^=,.�a- Care should be exercised in mounting
so that signs are generally in the same height zone for ease in spotting but do not block each
other out. A projecting sign shal] not be located below a wall sign if it would obstruct Yhe view
of the wail sign.
[SHA and GABA's 2004 recommendations included changing the first sentence of this paragraph to read, "No more
than one projecting sign every thirty (30) feet is allowed," which is a little ambiguous. Would it mean ffiat a 35 foot
wide lot could have projecting sign at each corner, but then an adjacent lot may not be able to have any? Would it
mean that two projecting signs could be 20 feet apart, each being the projecting sign for the'u 30 foot section? The
draft new language underlined here is unambiguous language to reflect SHA and GABA's intent.J
09-83&
Projectin� signs '��' ������* ^� �- ��,.'',:" ''^�'� °�-n>� shall have a mazimum gross surface
display area of �°°_<.��« sixteen (161 square feet ep r side. The highest point on a projecring
sign shall be no more than �����.�� 7`- '�^-) thirt 30 feet above grade.
[Change from 12 sq. ft. to 16 sq. ft. per side and from 20 R. to 30 ft. in height recommended by SHA and GABA.
Theu 2004 recommendations also included language here ihat projecting signs "cannot extend above the roof line of
the building" With the 2007 amendtnent to Chapter 64 that prohibiu roofsigns, defined as a sign erected upon or
above the roof or parapet of a building or structure," adding this language here is unnecessary.
SHA and GABA's 2004 recommendations also added language here that "the lowest point shal] be at least ten (1Q)
feet above gade, and the maacimutn projection shall be fow (4) feet from the building facade nearest Grand Avenue
or other street served by traffic signals." This added language appears to be unnecessary because it duplicates
language in § 64.412 of the Zoning Code that says "signs projecting over a pu6lic right-of-way may project up to
four (4) feet from the property ]ine, but in no case may come closer than two (2) feet from the curbline and ten (30)
feet above gound level." The last phrase in this SHAIGABA recommended language seems to suggest that it may
noY apply to streets not served by traffic signals, but this is ambiguous.)
Freestanding gele Signs
. ,
,
e��
� *�� �*-��� TM^'�� �fl �� ^��. There shall be no more than one freestandinQ gele sign per €e�}
{-08}feet lot is-a�le�vvec� and a freestandin� si�n shall be a minimum distance of forty (40) feet
from an,y other freestanding sien. Freestandin� gele signs '� ��* �""- °",.''':" ":"''' ^ °�
shall be set back at least five (5} feet from all propertv lines and have a masimum gross surface
display area of twenty four (24)'�� °�-oa..-b�a�ii � square feet per side. The highest point on a
freestanding �ale sign shall be no more than twenty (20) feet above grade; if located within a
reyuired vard it shall be no more than eight (81 feet above erade. Freestandine �ele signs shall
be sta2ionary (may not revolve) and have as little sriucture as possihle. Sien illumination should
be done in such a way that light spillover on adiacent pronerties is minimized
, •
[Deletions and addifions recommended by SHA and GABA, with some minor ediYs to simplify the language and
reduce ambiguity. Because the term "lot" is cleazly defined in the Zoning Code, allowing "one freestanding sign
Qer ]oP' is simpler and less ambiguous than the SHA{GABA language to allow one freestanding sign "per busmess
location (single or multi-tenant location)."
SHAlGABA recommended (anguage pettaining to sign illumination and an 8 foot maximum height for
' freestanding ground signs", with added ]anguage that the 8 foot height applies to freestanding signs within a
required yard, is moved here from the section below so that these two sections can be combined. Without this, the
language recommended by SHA and GABA would mean there could be a ZO foot high "freestanding pole sign"
anywhere a"freestanding gound sign° is limited to 8 feet in height. Houses that have been converted to
commercial use are generally in the in the BG Community Business (Converted) District. The language to limit
freestanding signs to 8 feet in height "if located within a required yard," language brought back from the original
1983 Grand Avenue Special District Sign Plan, applies to zoning districts with front yazd setback reyuirements
including the OS Office-Service, B I Local Business, and BC Community Business (Converted) districts.
First and last para�aph de]eted in order to be more concise.]
. ,
o9-s�
,
,.,....,._ .,. ,U,. ....�o«..,..,.,.,
"_ "_""_' "' '_- -_ _""_' `
rt,� �.....r .. .�..t. 7: o ♦.. ,.c',. ,.1,+ /41 F er Ar rl,.,r l.o ..l.r .3 ���
� , ic.r.
. '
�
A.,e.,.... C,......:..7 0;..�. T:..s..:..s ..1..,17 1.�, «...,11.�7 +.. Fl,e A.,o«..e
zz ....., .. ... ..� t .."..»..... .., ..._ . _. _...._.
[Delerion of second pazagraph recommended by SHA and GABA. The Zoning Code does not define pole arid
ground signs, they both fall under the definition of freestanding sign. This has caused confusion and problems such
as that noted above, where a ground sign is Iimited to 8 fee[ and a pole sign can 6e 20 feet high at the same location.
Combining these two sections under the term freestanding signs, together with the additiona] language
recommended above, solves this problem.]
Window Signs
> •
Window signs including temporarv window signs, should not exceed 30% of the store window
glass area. The lettering of the business name should not exceed twelve (12) si�� inches in height.
The lettering for other information should not exceed one inch in height. i°*'°�° ••.:"� '�
Temporary window signs add to visual ciutter and should be used only to advertise the property
for sale, rent, or lease, or for specific short-term sales for no more than three (3) nonconsecutive
times per calendar year for a period of not more than thirtv f30) davs ep r time. Old paper signs
are easily associated with "going out of business" sales. T'-° ~,°°':� "�° °:''� °':a° �~ '°" z�
(The SHAfGABA recommendations in 2004 included using the word "shalP' pertaining to the timing language for
temporary window signs, and prohibiting plastic-box-with-slide-on-]etters type si�s rather than saying they should
be avoided. However, Chapter 64, Signs, of the Zoning Code (under language in § 6a.401) only applies to exterior
signs. Special district sign plans aze adopted as supplements to Chapter 64, Signs, under the provisions in § 64.601,
and cannot be used to regulate things to which Chapter 64 does not apply. Therefore, the current Sign Plan only
provides guidance for signs inside of windows, and does not include regulatory language such as shall and prohibit.
Some deletions in order Yo be more concise.]
Temuorarv Si�ns
Temoorar�signs shall be regulated according to the reguirements for temporarv signs in the
1'NI-T'N3 Traditional Neighborhood and OS-B1 Business Districts in Section 64,503(b) of the
Zonin� Code with the exceQtion that the total azea of temporary freestandiny, and wall signs
allowed under Section 64.503(b�4) shall be a maacimum of twenty-four �24) square feet.
[This is the substance of new language pertaining to temporary signs recommended by SHA and GABA in 2004.
For temporary signs in BC, B2 and B3 Business Districts on Grand Avenue, this new language reduces the
masimum size of freesta�ding and wall real estate development signs from 100 sq. ft. to 50 sq. ft.; reduces the
maximum size of real estate signs from 12 sq, ft. to 6 sq. ft.; reduces the maximwn size of signs identifying an
engineer, architect or contractor engaged in construction of a building from 100 sq. ft. to 4 sq. ft.; and reduces the
maximum size of temporary freestanding and wall signs from 32 sq. ft. to 24 sq. feet.
� � :�c�
The rest of the 2004 SHA/GABA recommendations pertaining to temporary sign simply repeat language already in
Chapter 64, Signs, of the Zoning Code pertaining to temporary signs: language in § 64.122 defining temporary
signs, regulations in § 64.A19 that apply to temporary signs city-wide, language in § 64.420 that specifically
prohibits advertising sigis ciry-wide, and some of the regulations inc]uded in § 64.503(b) cited above. Repeating
this language in the Grand Avenue Special DisMct Sign Plan would be redundant and make the Si� Plan
unnecessazily longer and harder to read.
Portable Si�ns
Portabie si�ns shali be prohibited except to identify a business that does not have a door directly
to Grand Avenue but is located within a buiidins with frontage on Cnand Avenue. Information
on the sien shall only identify the business and shall not include promotional information.
Portable signs shalI be no more than fortv-two (421 inches in heieht and shall be re ated
accordin� to the requirements for portable siQns in the TN1-TN3 Traditional Nei�hborhood and
OS-BI Business Districts in Section 64.503(c) of the Zonin� Code, with the exception that the
total gross surface displav area of portable siens on a zoning lot shall not exceed thirtv-six (361
sauare feet.
(New language according to SHA/GABA 2004 recommendations, with edits to reduce ambiguiry. This new
language timits the businesses for which a portable sign can be used and information that can be presented on
portahle signs. It also reduces the maximum gross surface display area of portable signs on lots with street frontage
of over 330 feet from 300 sq. ft. to 36 sq. $., the same as for lots with street frontage of less than 330 feet, and
reduces the maximum height of portable signs from 6 ft, to 42 inches. Language recommended by SHA/GABA that
portable signs shall not present a pedestrian hazazd or take up more than one-third of the avai]ab]e sidewalk is not
included because, under § 64.5o3(c)(3), poRable signs can not be located in the public right-of-way (including the
public sidewalk) at all.]
�> >
>
. , , .
[A primary goal stated by the Summit Hill Association for changes to the Grand Avenue Special District Sign Plan
recommended by SHA and the Grand Avenue Business Association in 2004 is to cleaz up unnecessary language.
The language regarding provisions for legal nonconforming signs in this paragraph is redundant, therefore
unnecessary, and should be deleted. The Grand Avenue Special District Sign Plan is a supplement to Chapter 64,
Signs, of the Zoning Code and the detailed provisions and regulations for legal nonconforming signs in § 64301
apply to the Grand Avenue Special District Sign Plan. They should not be replicated here.
Local zoning provisions for continuation of structures and uses made nonconForming by adoption of an additional
zoning control are governed by, and must be consistent with, the provisions in MinnesoYa Statutes § 462.357 fQr
such lega] nonconforming uses. Additions to this paragaph on nonconforming signs recommended by SHAlGABA
in 2004 are either already covered in § 64.301 of the Zoning Code, already covered in Chapter 45 Nuisance
Abatement of the City Legislative Code, or would be illegal under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes § 4b2357.
Minnesota Statutes § 462.357, Subd. le, specifically allows legal nonconforming uses to "be continued, including
throu� repair, rep]acement, restoration, maintenance, or improvement, but not including expansion, unless: ( I) the
nonconformiry or occupancy is discontinued for a period of more than one year; or (2) any nonconforming use is
destroyed by fire or other peril to the extent of geater than 50 percent of iu mazket value, and no building permit
has been applied for with'vt 180 days of when the property is damaged °)
$�s^^�
[Move to first page to make these sections more prominent, clear, and consistent with the organization of the Zoning
Gode generally.J a