HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990 December Planning Commission Agenda PacketsAk
giN
�
.1 �� \'A E4��/
REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
AGENDA
DECEMBER 6, 1990
7:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER
7:30 P.M. REVIEW MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
7:35 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING COND USE
7:45 P.M. DISCUSSION
8:00 P.M. DISCUSSION
* Indicates a Public Hearing
SUPER VALUE UPDATE
1991 PLANNING
COMMISSION RETREAT
CHRISTENSON
BLD. CORP.
STAFF
STAFF
All times stated on the Planning Commission Agenda, with the
exception of Public Hearings, are approximate and may start later
than the scheduled time.
4629 Dakota St. SF, Prior Lake, Mirnesota 55372 1 Ph. (612) 447423D 1 Fax (612) 4474245
0, PRIp�
T.
� r
HERITAGE COMMUNFY W,f5(IV
1891 1991 209
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
NOVEMBER 15, 1990
The November 15, 1990, Planning Commission Meeting was called to
order by Chairman Arnold at 7:30 P.M. Those present were
Commissioners Loftus, Arnold, Kedrowski, Wells, Roseth, Director
of Planning Horst Graser, Assistant City Planner Deb Garross,
Associate Planner Steve Hess, and Secretary Rita Schewe.
ITEM I - REVIEW MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
MOTION BY LOFTUS, SECOND BY ROSETH, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS
WRITTEN.
Vote taken signified ayes by Kedrowski, Loftus, Arnold, and
Roseth. MOTION CARRIED. Commissioner Wells abstained as she
was not present at the previous meeting.
ITEM II - VAN SMITH BUILDERS - LAKESHORE VARIANCES
As the representative for Van Smith Builders was not present at
7:35 P.M., a suggestion by Commissioner Kedrowski was to allow 10
minutes for the applicant, if not present at that time, ITEM II
would be continued to the end of the agenda.
At 7:42 P.M. Joe Van Den Boom, representing Van Smith Builders,
5350 Carriage Hill Road, stated he is requesting a 42' north side
variance and 28' south side variance to replace and construct a
6' foot deck addition at 4688 Lord's Street.
Steve Hess presented the information as per memo of November 15,
1990. The applicant was before the Commissioners for a variance
request on a three season porch and the deck replacement and
addition had been inadvertently left Out. The subject lot is
located on an irregular shaped peninsula and the home has a
non - conforming setback. Staff's recommendation is to approve the
variances as requested as it would not be detrimental to the
health and welfare of the community.
Consensus from the Commissioners were in agreement with the
request.
MOTION BY ROSETH, SECOND BY LOFTUS, TO APPROVE A 42 FOOT
NORTHSIDE LAKESHORE VARIANCE AND A 28 FOOT SOUTH SIDE LAKESHORE
VARIANCE FOR 4688 LORD'S STREET, RATIONALE BEING THE EXISTING
4629 Dakota St. S.E, Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 4474230 / Fax (612) 4474245
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 15, 1990 PAGE 2
NON- CONFOPMTuG SETBACK STATUS OF THE HOME, THE EXISTING DECK
PROVIDES A HARDSHIP AND THE PROJECT WOULD NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO
THE HEALTH AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY.
Vote taken signified ayes by Roseth, Loftus, Kedrowski, Wells,
and Arnold. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM III - MICHAEL REICHOW - LAKESHORE AND LOT COVERAGE VARIAN
Michael L. Reichow, 15249 Fairbanks Trail, stated he is asking
for a 22 foot Lakeshore variance and a 6% lot coverage variance
for a deck addition.
Horst Graser presented the information as per memo of November
15, 1990. The deck was built without obtaining a building permit
and the applicant was instructed to apply, upon review of the
permit it was found a variance would be needed. A call was
received frim DNR stating the variances should be denied. The
substandard size of the lot is justification for hardship and
the deck provides safe access to the lower level of the yard.
Staff's recommendation is to approve the variance request.
Comments from the Commissioners concerned lot shape, the location
of the existing wrap around deck and that the requested variance
is equal to the nonconforming setback of the existing structure.
MOTION BY WELLS, SECOND BY LOFTUS, TO APPROVE A 22 FOOT LAKESHORE
VARIANCE AND A 6% LOT COVERAGE VARIANCE FOR 15249 FAIRBANKS
TRAIL, RATIONAL BEING THAT LOT SHAPE AND NON - CONFORMING HOME
SETBACK CAUSE THE HARDSHIP, THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT COMPROMISE
THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE AND WOULD NOT INFRINGE ON THE HEALTH
AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY.
Vote taken signified ayes by Wells, Loftus, Kedrowski, Arnold and
Roseth. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM IV - DAVID OLSON - VARIANCES
David Olson, 6776 - 161st St. West, Rosemount, stated that they
have purchased Lots 22, 23, and 34 on Twin Isles and wish to
construct a cabin. Variances being requested are a 41 foot
lakeshore setback variance, 25 foot lot width variance at the
904, 50 foot lot width variance at the front setback line and
a 31,160 square foot minimum lot area variance.
Deb Garross presented the information as per memo of November 15,
1990. The development of Twin Isles is governed by current
zoning requirements and Resolution 78 -22. The hardship is that
there is no buildable area available on the subject site when
existing setback standards are applied to the property. Staff
recommends approval of the variances with the six conditions as
listed in the memo.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 15, 1990 PAGE 3
Comments from the Commissioners were on future plans of
residency, tree replacement, gray water requirements, dock space
and parking lease.
MOTION BY ROSETH, SECOND BY LOFTUS, TO GRANT TO LOTS 22, 23, and
34, A 41 FOOT LAKESHORE VARIANCE, 25 FOOT LOT WIDTH VARIANCE AT
THE 904, 50 FOOT LOT WIDTH VARIANCE AT FRONT SETBACK LINE, 31,160
SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM LOT AREA VARIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING
CONDITIONS:
1. TREE AND VEGETATION REMOVAL BE RESTRICTED TO THE AREA NEEDED
TO CONSTRUCT THE CABIN AND GRAY WATER DISPOSAL SYSTEM.
2. GRAYWATER DISPOSAL SYSTEM BE LOCATED AT LEAST 75 FEET FROM
THE 904 CONTOUR.
3. THE APPLICANT MUST SUBMIT A LEASE AGREEMENT THAT DEMONSTRATES
THAT AT LEAST TWO ON -LAND PARKING SPACES EXIST.
4. THE APPLICANT MUST SUBMIT PROOF OF RESIDENCY OTHER THAN TWIN
ISLES AT THE TIME OF BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION.
5. THE APPLICANT MUST SUBMIT PLANS FOR A SELF ENCLOSED OR
INCINERATOR TYPE OF SEPTIC SYSTEM FOR THE CABIN.
6. THE APPLICANT MUST SUBMIT A REVISED SURVEY INDICATING THE
TYPE OF TREES AND VEGETATION LOCATED ON THE SITE, THE
VEGETATION THAT IS TO BE REMOVED AND AN EROSION CONTROL AND
PLANTING PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY AND THE REPLACEMENT OF TREES
AT STAFF'S DISCRETION.
RATIONALE BEING SITE CONSTRAINT, ACCESSIBILITY, SEASONAL USE,
SUBSTANDARD LOT AND IN LINE WITH ADJACENT CABINS.
Vote taken signified ayes by Roseth, Loftus, Kedrowski, Wells,
and Arnold. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM V - BRAD POLIVANY - SIDE YARD VARIANCE
Brad Polivany, 14891 Pixie Point Circle, is requesting a 5.8
foot south side yard variance to construct a garage in order to
alleviate a drainage problem.
Horst Graser presented the information as per memo of November
15, 1990. The applicant has a severe drainage problem caused
possibly by several actions; development of homes after
construction of applicants' home, improvement of Pixie Point
Circle, and landscaping improvements. Construction of the garage
appears to be the most logical solution. City of Prior Lake will
provide survey work, stakes, materials and drainage calculations
to engineer a system that will drain the area. The property
owners have agreed to install and grade the site and provide a
private maintenance agreement for the pipe which will be located
on Mr. Polivany's property. Staff's recommendation is to
approve the variance request. The alternative solution would
involve a feasibility study and an expensive storm sewer project
which would be assessed against the properties.
Herb Lindsey, 5912 -150th St. stated he and his wife support the
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 15, 1990 PAGE 4
variance but they do not accept responsibility for any short term
or long term drain pipe construction but will assist with
construction and maintenance as they are willing and able.
Consensus from the Commissioners were in concurrence with the
application.
MOTION BY KEDROWSKI, SECOND BY LOFTUS, TO APPROVE A 5.8 FOOT
SOUTH SIDE YARD VARIANCE FOR 14891 PIXIE POINT CIRCLE TO
CONSTRUCT A GARAGE TO ALLEVIATE THE DRAINAGE PROBLEM ON THE
PROPERTY, SITUATION IS UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY AND THE
CONSTRUCITON OF THE GARAGE WOULD FACILITATE THE ELIMINATION OF A
PROBLEM THAT COULD PRODUCE PROPERTY DAMAGE AND THEREFORE BE
DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALTH AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY. THE
VARIANCE WOULD NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALTH AND WELFARE OF
THE COMMUNITY.
Vote taken signified ayes by Kedrowski, Loftus, Wells, Arnold,
and Roseth. MOTION CARRIED.
A 5 minute recess was called at 8:50 P.M. The meeting was
reconvened at 9:00 P.M. by Chairman Arnold.
ITEM VI- JAN BALLARD MCWILLIES' RESTAURANT - CONDITIONAL USE
Commissioner Kedrowski stated that he would abstain from any
participation and discussion on this item as he represents the
Lions Club in business transactions with McWillies Restaurant.
Jan Ballard, representing McWillies on the Lake Restaurant, 3570
Green Heights Trail, stated she is requesting a conditional use
permit to place signs on the highways to direct the public to
McWillies. A hardship does exist as the restaurant is not
visible from a major highway. The restaurant was established in
1907 and signs would help preserve the history of McWillies. It
is the only restaurant located on Prior Lake.
Horst Graser Presented the information as per memo of November
15, 1990. Signs would display the name of the establishment and
the State has approved 2 signs on Highway 13 near County Road 29.
Applicant is requesting 5 directional signs within Prior Lake to
direct traffic to McWillies. Recommendation from Staff is to
approve the conditional use application.
Dick Casey, Viking Liquor owner, County Road 21 and Highway 13,
and Jim Culton, 16554 Franklin Trail, Manager of convenience
store at Dakota and Main, support the sign application as they
have given directions to McWillies.
Comments from the Commissioners were on increased traffic
patterns, and different route possibilities.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 15, 1990 PAGE 5
MOTION BY ROSETH, SECOND BY WELLS, TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT APPLICATION FOR MCWILLIES ON THE LAKE RESTAURANT TO ALLOW
THE ERECTION OF SIGNS WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
THAT THE SIGNS BE MAINTAINED IN SAFE, AESTHETICALLY PLEASING
AND GOOD STRUCTURAL CONDITION AT ALL TIMES.
THE MAXIMUM SIZE OF THE SIGN TO BE LOCATED AT THE
INTERSECTION OF WEST AVENUE AND PLEASANT STREET NOT EXCEED
24" X 12 ". THE SIGN SHOULD BE CONSTRUCTED OF CEDAR OR
REDWOOD WITH ROUTED LETTERS. SIGN COLORS SHOULD BE SIMILAR
TO THE COLOR SCHEME USED BY MCWILLIES. THE SIGN DESIGN,
LOCATION, AND COLOR SCHEME, IS SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL.
THE SIGNS NOT BE ILLUMINATED.
Vote taken signified ayes by Roseth, Wells, Loftus, .Arnold, and
Kedrowski. MOTION CARRIED. This item will go before the City
Council.
ITEM VII PUBLIC HEARING CHRISTENSEN BUILDING CORP. -
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE APPLICATION
Public Hearing called to order at 9:45 P.M. by Chairman Arnold.
Public was in attendance.
Ted Schweich representing Christensen Building Corp., 2910
Multifoods Tower, 33 South 6th St. Minneapolis, MN, stated they
are requesting a conditional use permit and variance to construct
a proposed retail center, detached car wash and a three pump
island gas dispensary for the vacant .87 acres located on the
northwest corner of the intersection of S.T.H. 13 and Pleasant
Street. A conditional use permit is needed for the car wash and
an 18 foot variance for the pump island canopy and an 8 foot
variance for a 32 foot driveway. Mr. Schweich explained the
various businesses, traffic flow and parking plan proposed by
applicant.
Horst Graser presented the information as per memo of November
15, 1990 and gave a brief summary on the history of the subject
site. Perhaps some of the reasons this site has not developed is
access, traffic flow, soil conditions, market factors and
negative influences by other uses. This site is very visible and
should be developed to its highest potential to enhance the
appearance and image of this downtown block to give a positive
identity to the community. The charge to the Planning Commission
is to determine if this proposal should be approved or if changes
should be made, deleted, and /or redesigned. The proposal shows
that virtually the entire lot is asphalt, parking 1s proposed on
public right -of -way which will need County, City and perhaps
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 15, 1990 PAGE 6
MNDOT input, the sidewalk is proposed on public right -of -way
which would not be allowed without a permit, area traffic cannot
properly flow through the development as proposed and landscaping
is not adequate for the area. The demands of the proposal exceed
the capabilities of the site. In view of the evidence of this
application it should be denied. An alternative would be to
continue this proposal to give the applicant time to resubmit a
revised site plan.
Steve Neilson, partner in the proposal, explained the concept
that fast food, gas and car wash would be a one -stop shop. Mr.
Neilson is the owner of Main Avenue Video, and Express Gas and
Grocery in Prior Lake.
Jim Rabuse, Delwood, Prior Lake Amoco co- owner, explained that he
felt that the issue is to maintain the integrity of the downtown
development. He questioned the location of gas tanks, access for
tankers to unload, stacking of cars to carwash, how many parking
spaces were proposed.
Bernie Carlson, Carlson Hardware, supports development but is
concerned on traffic flow and impact of the proposed development
on his business.
Dick Casey, Viking Liquor owner, stated that development is
needed but plan needs to be modified to reflect better traffic
flow for the site and block.
Ted Schweich explained various aspects of the proposal in answer
to questions raised.
Concerns from the Commissioners were on traffic flow, the mixture
and number of uses proposed seemed to be too much for the site
and perhaps the applicant should consider possible purchase of
land adjacent to Main Avenue to increase the site size. The
proposed landscaping is not adequate, the parking plan does not
reflect adequate turning radii and the parking stalls appear to
be too far removed from the retail building. The Commissioners
were concerned about safety of pedestrians and consumers who
would have to cross traffic lanes and gas pump traffic from the
parking areas located on the east side of the property. There
should be a certified survey. The applicant should provide
information from Scott County and MNDOT that the necessary
permits and approvals have been received in order to implement
the proposal. Comment was made that future proposals should be
complete and submitted by established deadline dates to insure
that Staff and the Planning Commissioners have ample review time
to prepare for hearings on this proposal.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 15, 1990 PAGE 7
It was the consensus of the Commission that the applicant revise
the site plan to incorporate the following:
1. Certified Lot Survey indicating property lines, easements,
right of way location and proposed buildings relative to the
subject site.
2. A functional, safe, easily accessible frontage road system
that will accommodate the site and other businesses in the
block.
3. A landscaping plan that at minimum, continues the plantin
efforts of adjacent business and improvements adjacent to
County Road 21. The plan should indicate the methods of
screening proposed to buffer refuse containers, loading
areas, mechanical equipment and planting materials should be
increased for the site.
4. The site traffic circulation and parking plan must indicate
that adequate turning radii, stacking, loading /unloading, and
internal circulation systems exist that will accommodate
trucks and cars. The parking scheme would be designed to
encourage safety, organized traffic movements and
employee /customer parking areas should be designated.
5. The site plan should reflect a pedestrian orientation where
people will be able to walk to the buildings proposed on the
site and to other businesses in and adjacent to the block.
The sidewalk system should connect to existing sidewalks and
bike paths.
6. The applicant should provide examples of the types and color
of exterior materials proposed for all of the buildings. The
exterior materials should be of brick, wood, stucco or other
materials which complement the adjacent Viking Liquor
expansion.
7. The location of underground tanks should be identified.
8. The applicant should develop a plan that indicates proposed
future expansion options and how this site will be integrated
with the adjacent properties and land uses.
9. The application should contain agreements, permits and any
other approvals from affected property owners and government
jurisdictions prior to approval of any conditional use permit
for the site.
CONSENSUS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS TO CONTINUE THE HEARING
FOR CHRISTENSEN BUILDING CORPORATION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND
VARIANCE APPLICATIONS TO DECEMBER 6, 1990 AT 7:35 P.M.
ITEM VIII - STAFF - 1991 RETREAT DISCUSSION
Possible locations and dates for the Planning Commission annual
retreat were discussed by the Commissioners. Dates of January
18 -19, February 1 -2, and February 15 -16, and locations of
Rochester, Riverwood, Northwood, and Stillwater will be checked
into by Staff.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 15, 1990 PAGE 8
MOTION BY KEDROWSKI, SECOND BY LOFTUS, TO ADJOURN MEETING.
Vote taken signified ayes by Kedrowski, Loftus, Wells, Roseth,
and Arnold. MOTION CARRIED.
Meeting adjourned at 11:17 P.M.
Hall.
Tapes of meeting on file at City
Horst Graser
Director of Planning
Rita M. Schewe
Recording Secretary
/F PR��\
"CUO2P2"
HERITAGE
1891
COMMUNITY 4�✓'J- - v
1991 2091
PLANNING REPORT
APPLICANT: CHRISTENSEN BUILDING CORPORATION
ITEM: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE
APPLICATIONS
PRESENTER: HORST GRASER
PUBLIC HEaRING: X YES NO
DATE: DECEMBER 6, 1990
The Planning Commission held a hearing on November 15, 1990 to
consider a retail development submittal from Christensen Building
Corporation for a development proposed adjacent to Pleasant
street and S.T.H. 13. The applicant was directed to incorporate
findings of the Planning Commission and to resubmit the site plan
for consideration on December 6, 1990 at 7:35 p.m.
Please be advised that the applicant is in the process of
revising plans however, the information could not be compiled in
order to meet the submittal deadline for this evening's meeting.
Staff would recommend that the public hearing for conditional use
and variance be continued for two weeks to December 20, 1990 at
7:35 p.m.
4629 Dakota St. SE, Prior lace, Minnesota 55372 f Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax(612)4474245
11M STATE OF GJ Is f (0)
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
PHONE NO. METRO WATERS, 1200 WARNER RD., ST. PAUL, MN 551VVE NO.
772-7910
November 29, 1990
Ms. Deb Garross
City of Prior Lake
4629 Dakota Street S.E.
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
Dear Me - pa"-:
I am writing in regard to the City's handling of it's shoreland
ordinance, specifically, the variance process.
I want to commend you for your timeliness and completeness in
sending me notification of variances within the City of Prior Lake.
Over the past several weeks, I have had some variance notices sent
to me to which I was unable to provide a response. I know the City
is interested in DNR input, and apologize for not responding.
However, my experience has been that you, the planning commission,
and the city council do an effective and thorough job of
administering your shoreland ordinance. For that I am grateful.
I just wanted to express my appreciation, and assure you that I
will try to continue responding to all your floodplain and
shoreland inquiries in a timely manner.
Please pass along my gratitude to Horst, the planning commission,
and council.
Pain rely,
trick J.
Area Hydro ryn
og
PJL20/CL
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
CniN HER /TAGS CQMM! m 1891 1991 2oyl
DECEMBER 20, 1990
7:30 P.M.
CALL 70 ORDER
7 :30 P.M.
REVIEW MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
* 7:35 P.M.
PUBLIC HERRING SIGN ORDINANCE AKENMIBNP STAFF
* 8:00 P.M.
PUBLIC HEARIM ODNPINUE HEARTED FOR CH11I9TENa7N
ODNDITIONAL USE AND BUILDERS
VARIANCE
* Indicates a Public Nearing
All times stated on the Planning Camnission Agenda, with the exception of Public
Hearings, are approximate and may start later than the scheduled ties.
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 1 Ph. (612) 447 -4230 / Fax (612) 4474245
/� PRl
HER /TAGS
)% + 189/
COMMUMTY
1991
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
DECEMBER 6, 1990
20
The December 6, 1990, Planning Commission Meeting was called to
order by Chairman Arnold at 7:30 P.M. Those present were
Commissioners Loftus, Arnold, Kedrowski, Wells, Roseth, Director
of Planning Horst Graser, Associate Planner Steve Hess, and
Secretary Rita Schewe.
ITEM I - REVIEW MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
Commissioner Kedrowski made a correction to the minutes, page 5,
paragraph 2, line 2, delete the name Kedrowski on voting as he
had abstained. Chairman Arnold stated on page 4, paragraph 9,
line 2, the name Culton is misspelled, should be Kalton.
MOTION BY LOFTUS, SECOND BY KEDROWSKI, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS
AMENDED.
Vote taken signified ayes by Kedrowski, Loftus, Arnold, Wells,
and Roseth. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM II - PUBLIC HEARING - CHRISTENSON BLD. CORP.- CONTINUED
Public Hearing was reconvened at 7:35 P.M. by Chairman Arnold.
As per memo of December 6, 1990, stating that the applicant is
still in the process of revising plans for the project. Mr.
Graser gave a brief status report on the application and the
Public Hearing should be continued.
MOTION BY KEDROWSKI, SECOND BY WELLS, TO RESCHEDULE THE PUBLIC
HEARING FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES FOR
CHRISTENSON BUILDING CORPORATION TO DECEMBER 20, 1990, 8:00 P.M.
Vote taken signified ayes by Kedrowski, Wells, Loftus, Arnold,
and Roseth. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEM III - SUPER VALUE UPDATE - STAFF
Horst Graser presented information on the status of the Super
Valu Store construction. The contract between Enivid Corporation
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 4474230 / Fax(612)447-4245
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES DECEMBER 6, 1990 PAGE 2
and Super Valu is expected to be signed possibly within ten days
thereby clearing the way for the beginning of construction.
ITEM IV - 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION 1991 RETREAT - STAFF
Retreat information was presented to the Commissioners on three
locations, IDS Oak Ridge Conference Center in Chaska, Riverwood
in Monticello, and The Outing Lodge at Pine Point in Stillwater.
After consideration the location chosen was Riverwood and dates
of February 1 and 2, 1990, were set.
Discussion followed on possible agenda items for the retreat.
Some suggestions were transportation issues, downtown
development, interpreting the Comprehensive Plan, case study of
an existing PUD, possibly Priorview, and for a speaker, engage
two or three developers to give their views and expectations
regarding PUD's -nd developing sites and what they expect from
the City.
MOTION BY LOFTUS, _.AND BY KEDROWSKI, TO ADJOURN MEETING.
Vote taken signified ayes by Loftus, Kedrowski, Roseth, Wells,
and Arnold. MOTION CARRIED.
Meeting adjourned at 8:30 P.M
Hall.
Tape of meeting on file at City
Horst Graser
Director of Planning
Rita M. Schewe
Recording Secretary
PRIO
J � 'P HERITAGE COMMUNITY 9/9J.W -1°
� 191 1991 2oy>
"SI09PC"
PLANNING REPORT
ITEM: CONSIDER SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS
PRESENTER: DEB GARROSS, ASSISTANT CITY PLANNER
PUBLIC HEARING: X YES NO
DATE: DECEMBER 20, 1990
HISTORY /BACKGROUND -
The purpose o thus item is to consider five proposed amendments
to Prior Lake Sign ordinance 83 -5. The amendments are proposed
in order to assist in the enforcement of provisions related to
temporary and election sign display. Staff conducted extensive
research on these issues and proposes that the Sign Ordinance be
amended to incorporate the language that will be discussed below.
Included in your agenda packet please find excerpts from several
Planning Advisory Reports and the results of a survey which was
conducted by staff, which reveals how temporary signs are
regulated in other metro communities and their respective sign
permit fee schedules.
The first amendment proposed is to add a purpose section to the
Ordinance. The purpose gives the underlying rationale for sign
regulations and states that the City encourages the effective
use of signs as a means of promotion and communication. However,
it is also recognized that inappropriate use of signs cause
negative impacts to the character and quality of our
neighborhoods and business community. The purpose statement was
written by staff after review of similar statements found in sign
ordinances of several metropolitan municipalities and Planning
Advisory Service Reports.
PROPOSED ADDITION OF: 5 -7 -1 PURPOSE:
Signs have an impact on the character and quality of the
environment as a prominent part of the scenery; they attract or
repel the viewing public, affect the safety of vehicular traffic;
and their suitability or appropriateness helps to set the tone of
the business district and neighborhood. When signs are too
numerous and inappropriate, they can downgrade ar, area,
depreciate property values, and discourage investors and
visitors. Further, their use violates the rights of other sign
users who have higher standards and values for the community.
The purpose of these sign regulations are to: Encourage the
effective use of signs as a means of promotion and communication
in Prior Lake; to maintain and enhance the aesthetic environment
4629 Dakota St. SE., Prior lake, Minnesota %372 / Ph. (612) 447 -4230 / Fax(612)4474245
and the City's ability to attract sources of economic development
and growth; to improve pedestrian and traffic safety; to minimize
the possible adverse effect of signs on nearby public and private
property; and to enable the fair and consistent use of authority
to enforce these sign restrictions. The provisions of this
ordinance are intended to encourage creativity, a reasonable
degree of freedom of choice, an opportunity for effective
communication, and a sense of concern for the visual amenities on
the part of those who design and display exterior signs while;
at the same time, assuring that the public is not endangered,
annoyed or distracted by the unsafe, disorderly, indiscriminate
or unnecessary use of exterior signs.
The second amendment is to remove paragraph (B) TEMPORARY SIGNS
from section 5 -7 -5 which exempts certain types of signs from
payment of sign permit fees.
5 -7 -5 EXEMPTION FROM FEES:
Propose to remove item (B) which currently exempts temporary
signs from fees. The purpose would be to establish a permit fee
for temporary signs when the Council adopts its annual Fee
Schedule. It is the recommendation of staff that a permit fee be
established by the City Council for temporary signs in order to
pay for administrative costs of implementing the Ordinance. The
fee amount has not been determined at this time however, staff
would recommend a fee in accordance with that which is charged by
other metropolitan communities. The staff review procedure
involves an initial site inspection of the property to
determine if there is sign space available for display of
temporary signs. The permit must be logged and entered into the
Planning Department's property management computer system.
Compliance dates are then filed in the department tickler file.
A follow up inspection is required in order to determine if the
sign(s) have been removed by the date specified on the permit.
If compliance is not achieved, staff must then proceed to notify
the applicant that the permit is expired and work with the permit
holder to effect sign removal.
The third amendment is related to election signs and is proposed
to bring the existing Ordinance into compliance with State
Statutes. The language in this section is proposed by City
Attorney, Glenn Kassel.
5 -7 -5 (F) AMEND LANGUAGE RELATED TO ELECTION SIGN DISPLAY:
Election Signs: Political advertising of public elections is
permitted on private property in any zoning district with the
express consent of the owner or occupant of such property. In a
state general election year, such signs may not be posted before
August 1 and must be removed by those responsible for the
erection of the sign or the property owner within ten (10) days
following the state general election. In any year other than a
state general election year, such signs may not be posted more
than sixty (60) days prior to the election and must be removed by
those responsible for the erection of the sign or the property
owner within seven (7) days following the election. No election
sign shall be erected in the right -of -way of any public road or
within a forty (40) foot clear view triangular area of a corner
lot. The clear view triangular area is defined as follows:
Beginning at the intersection of the projected lot lines of the
corner lot, thence forty feet (40 along one lot line, thence
diagonally to a point forty feet (40 from the point of
beginning on the opposite lot line.
The fourth amendment proposed concerns fee schedules. Staff
proposes that the current Ordinance be amended as follows:
5 -7 -7 (B) FEES:
1. The City Council shall establish the permit fee structure for
signs on an annual basis. The sign permit fees shall be
indicated on the annual City of Prior Lake Fee Schedule.
2. Signs which need a conditional use permit must pay the
established sign permit fee plus such additional fee as may
be required for the conditional use permit.
3. Prior to the issuance of a permit for a temporary or portable
sign, a deposit of $100.00 dollars in the form of cash, check
or money order must be provided to the City. Said deposit
will be refunded only if the sign is removed by noon of the
next business day after the permit period expires, unless
otherwise agreed to, in writing, by the city and applicant
prior to issuance of the permit.
4. Fees may be waived by the City Council for signs containing a
religious, civic, school or public interest subject. (Ord.
84 -06)
5. No fee shall be required for signs exempted by Section 5 -7 -5.
The final amendment is proposed in order to assist in the
enforcement of the Ordinance provisions. Staff has found that
many metro communities incorporate similar language which defines
a specific procedure that can be implemented by the City in order
to effect removal of signs that violate the provisions of the
Sign Ordinance. The specific language that is proposed is as
follows:
PROPOSED 5 -7 -9:
REMOVAL OF SIGNS: If the City finds that any sign, temporary or
permanent, or other advertising structure regulated herein is
unsafe or insecure, a menace to the public, or in violation of
the provisions of this Chapter, the Director of Planning or
designee, shall give written notice to the holder of the permit.
The holder of the permit shall remove or alter the structure so
as to comply with the standards required by this Ordinance and
indicated by the Planning Director within ten (10) days after
issuance of such notice. If after receiving said notice such
person fails to remove or alter said sign so as to comply with
the provisions of this ordinance, such sign shall be deemed to be
a nuisance and may be abated by the City by proceedings taken
under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and the cost of abatement,
including administration expenses and reasonable attorneys' fees,
may be levied as a special assessment against the property upon
which the sign is located.
The City may cause any sign or sign structure which is an
immediate public hazard, to be removed summarily after a
reasonable attempt has been made to have the property owner
remove the sign.
When the City mails the notice of violation, copies will be sent
to both the permit holder and the property owner, if they are
different persons.
RECOMMENDATION•
The r elation from staff is to approve the amendments as
proposed and to forward this issue to the City Council for
consideration.
/F PRIG
HER/TAGE COMMUNITY
1891 1991 2ay>
"SA09PN"
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN
AMENDMENT TO PRIOR LAKE SIGN ORDINANCE 83 -5
You are hereby notified that the Planning Commission will hold a
Public Hearing in the Prior Lake City Council Chambers at 4629
Dakota Street S.E., on Thursday December 20, 1990 at 7:35 p.m.
The purpose of the hearing is to consider several proposed
changes to the Sign Ordinance which was originally adopted in
1983. The following paragraphs are proposed in order to add a
Purpose Statement to the Ordinance; to establish sign permit fees
according to an annual fee schedule to be adopted by the Prior
Lake City Council; to amend language related to political
election signs to make the local Ordinance compliant with
Minnesota Statutes and to define a specific procedure that can be
implemented by the City of Prior Lake to effect removal of signs
that violate the provisions of the Sign Ordinance. The specific
language that is proposed is as follows:
PROPOSED SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT LANGUAGE:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PRIOR LAKE CITY CODE TITLE 5, CHAPTER 7 AND
ORDINANCE 83 -5 SECTION 5 -7 -1.
PROPOSE ADDITION OF: 5 -7 -1 PURPOSE:
Signs have an impact on the character and quality of the
environment as a prominent part of the scenery; they attract or
repel the viewing public, affect the safety of vehicular traffic;
and their suitability or appropriateness helps to set the tone of
the business district and neighborhood. When signs are too
numerous and inappropriate, they can downgrade an area,
depreciate property values, and discourage investors and
visitors. Further, their use violates the rights of other sign
users who have higher standards and values for the community.
The purpose of these sign regulations are to: Encourage the
effective use of signs as a means of promotion and communication
in Prior Lake; to maintain and enhance the aesthetic environment
and the City's ability to attract sources of economic development
and growth; to improve pedestrian and traffic safety; to minimize
the possible adverse effect of signs on nearby public and private
property; and to enable the fair and consistent use of authority
to enforce these sign restrictions. The provisions of this
ordinance are intended to encourage creativity, a reasonable
degree of freedom of choice, an opportunity for effective
communication, and a sense of concern for the visual amenities on
the part of those who design and display exterior signs while;
4629 Dakota St. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447 -4230 / Faz (612) 447 -4245
at the same time, assuring that the public is not endangered,
annoyed or distracted by the unsafe, disorderly, indiscriminate
or unnecessary use of exterior signs.
5 -7 -5 EXEMPTION FROM FEES:
Propose to remove item (B) which currently exempts temporary
signs from fees. The purpose would be to establish a permit fee
for temporary signs when the Council adopts its annual Fee
Schedule.
5 -7 -5 (F) AMEND LANGUAGE AS PROPOSED BY GLENN KESSEL:
Election Signs: Political advertising of public elections is
permitted on private property in any zoning district with the
express consent of the owner or occupant of such property. in a
state general election year, such signs may not be posted before
August 1 and must be removed by those responsible for the
erection of the sign or the property owner within ten (10) days
following the state general election. In any year other than a
state general election year, such signs may not be posted more
than sixty (60) days prior to the election and must be removed by
those responsible for the erection of the sign or the property
owner within seven (71 days following the election. No election
sign shall be erected in the right -of -way of any public road or
within a forty (40) foot clear view triangular area of a corner
lot. The clear view triangular area is defined as follows:
Beginning at the intersection of the projected lot lines of the
corner lot, thence forty feet (40 along one lot line, thence
diagonally to a point forty feet (40 from the point of
beginning on the opposite lot line.
5 -7 -7 (B) FEES:
1. The City Council shall establish the permit fee structure for
signs on an annual basis. The sign permit fees shall be
indicated on the annual City of Prior Lake Fee Schedule.
2. Signs which need a conditional use permit must pay the
established sign permit fee plus such additional fee as may
be required for the conditional use permit.
3. Prior to the issuance of a permit for a temporary or portable
sign, a deposit of $100.00 dollars in the form of cash, check
or money order must be provided to the City. Said deposit
will be refunded only if the sign is removed by noon of the
next business day after the permit period expires, unless
otherwise agreed to, in writing, by the City and applicant
prior to issuance of the permit.
4. Fees may be waived by the City Council for signs containing a
religious, civic, school or public interest subject. (Ord.
B4 -06)
5. No fee shall be required for signs exempted by Section 5 -7 -5.
PROPOSED 5 -7 -9:
REMOVAL OF SIGNS: If the City finds that any sign, temporary or
permanent, or other advertising structure regulated herein is
unsafe or insecure, a menace to the public, or in violation of
the provisions of this Chapter, the Director of Planning or
designee, shall give written notice to the holder of the permit.
The holder of the permit shall remove or alter the structure so
as to comply with the standards required by this Ordinance and
indicated by the Planning Director within ten (10) days after
issuance of such notice. If after receiving said notice such
person fails to remove or alter said sign so as to comply with
the provisions of this ordinance, such sign shall be deemed to be
a nuisance and may be abated by the City by proceedings taken
under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, and the cost of abatement,
including administration expenses and reasonable attorneys' fees,
may be levied as a special assessment against the property upon
which the sign is located.
The City may cause any sign or sign structure which is an
immediate public hazard, to be removed summarily after a
reasonable attempt has been made to have the property owner
remove the sign.
When the City mails the notice of violation, copies will be sent
to both the permit holder and the property owner, if they are
different persons.
If you desire to be heard in reference to this matter, you should
attend this hearing. The Planning Commission will accept oral
and or written comments. If you have questions regarding this
matter, contact the Prior Lake Planning Department at 447 -4230.
Deb Garross
Assistant City Planner
To be published in the Prior Lake American on Monday December 10
and 17, 1990.
SIGN PERMIT FEES BY CITY
Golden Valley
20.00 + .30 above certain sq. ft.
Temporary signs are not allowed.
Anoka
10.00 temp signs.
Edina
50.00 for all signs.
Banners /pennants prohibited except for
grand openings where they may be used for
one week.
Fridley
24.00 = 40 sq. ft.
60.00 = 41+ sq. ft.
200.00 deposit for temp + fee above.
White Bear Lake
50.00 all signs.
15.00 alterations to existing signs.
N. St. Paul
15.50 all signs.
Banners are prohibited.
Shakopee
10.50 temporary signs.
20.00 + .25 for X sq. ft. over minimum.
One temporary sign at one time maximum of
32 sq. ft. only for 30 days per calendar
year. Portables used maximum of 14 days
per calendar year.
Burnsville
35.00 sign permit.
5.00 temporary signs.
Prohibits portables, bench and banners.
Banners may be approved for non
commercial purposes.
Apple Valley
50.00 all signs.
1,000.00 residential monuments.
Banners /streamers prohibited except for
grand openings, holidays only to be used
30 calendar days out of the year.
Maple Grove
20.00 0 - 500 sq. ft.
5.00 for each sq. ft. above 500.
Eden Prairie
12.00 0 - 33 sq. ft.
15.00 34 - 50 sq. ft.
18.00 51 - 100 sq. ft.
20.00 101 - 200 sq. ft.
22.00 201 - 300 sq. ft.
24.00 301 - 400 sq. ft.
2.50 + each sq. ft. over 400
Banners /pennants prohibited except for
grand openings where they may be
displayed for only one week.
Eagan Temporary signs allowed only for special
civic events or garage or neighborhood
sales not longer than 20 days.
Richfield Prohibits all portable signs. Temporary
signs subject to restrictions, maximum
display 7 days. No more than 4 permits
for one location per calendar year.
The Effect of Sign
Coherence on the
of Retail Scenes
jack L. Nasar
Complexity and
Perceived Quality
This article presents three studies that examine the effect of signsnpe complexity
and coherence on perceived visual quality of streetside commercial svnes. For
these studies I asked shoppers and merchants to examine color photographs of
nine simulated streetside scenes, each of which had a different level of complexity
(operationalized as variety in size, shape, and color in signs and letters) and
coherence toperational(zed through size and contrast in signs and letters). Responses
of both shoppers and merchants showed that reductions in size and contrast
enhanced coherence, that excitement varied directly with complexity and inversely
with coherence, and that pleasantness and calmness were highest for moderate
complexity and high coherence. I conclude with recommendations for a revised
sign ordinance.
Cle arly, urban commercial strips produce visual
overload (Rapoport andFawkes 1970), and the sign -
scape (the multiplicity of o(a)rs that the viewer can
comprrhend in a single view) contributes greatly to
O'W thtso� a study of�bltc responses to com-
iner iadscenesfrrowhich various features were re-
moved, tea rs at sr were
y noticeable m e eta . ); i in snot er
Stud soar , WVUCII ASKeG t e pu is to escri
the physical elements that most reduced visual quality,
people most frequen0y cited signs and billboards.
alone may present a favorable image and attract
attention, but many such sign pla -b
M"' aeaee c us planners an legislation ust
consider the combn - ed visual effect of signs an masse —
the signscape.
Cities and commercial areas try to control the sign -
scape through such mechanisms as sign ordinances
and design review. To help frame guidelines for sign
ordinances and review procedures, empirical research
thus far has centered on recognition, recall, and traffic
safety (Ewald and Mandelker 1977; Tunnard and
Pushkarev 1981: 277 -326; Carr 1971). Although design
professionals (Rapoport and Hawkes 1970; Lozano
1974) theorize about urban visual quality, empirical
analysis of perceived visual quality in the signscape
lags behind.
This report provides empirical information on the
effect of signscape features on perceived visual quality.
Inc research centered on the commonalities in per-
ceived visual quality rather than on individual differ-
ences. Individuals, of course, may differ in their judg-
ments of perceived visual quality; however, since
Near, is associate prafeesor of city and regioed planning at
The Ohio State University. He has edited a book on environ-
mental aesthetic, which grill be published by Cambridge
University Press. no alai research interests include urban
aenhen a, cognition, sad span) beharne r,
Auernare 150117 499
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
ORDINANCE NO. 83 -5
AN ORDINANCE REP &ING PRIOR LAID; CITY CODE CHAPTER 7, SFITICKS 5-7 -1 THPaiGH
5-7 -14 MID ADOPTING AND RERIDLISHING SAID SIGN ORDINANCES, AS AM OM, IN ITS
EIIfIRM TO READ AS FOLLOWS:
PTV 1 1T�
D •
5-7- 1:
Definitions
5-7- 2:
Permit and Prohibited Signs
5-7- 3:
Signs required in any Districts
5-7- 4:
Signs in any Districts
5-7- 5:
Emem Lion
5-7- 6:
Mn- oonforming Signs
5-7- 7:
Permit Requirements
5-7- 8:
Cancellation
5-7- 9:
Raoval of Signs
5 -7 -10:
Fines
5 -7 -11:
Appeals
5 -7 -12:
Severance Clause
5 -7 -13:
Revoke Permit
5 -7 -14:
Maintenance
5-7 -1: DEFINITIONS
SIGNS: Any written announcements, declaration, demonstration,
display, illustration, insignia or illumination used to
advertise or prorate the interest of any person or persons
when the same is displayed or placed out of doors in the view
of the general public, or a pylon exterior wall or building
surface or inside of a building within three feet 0 of a
transparent window. A sign shall be considered as a
structure or a part of a structure for the purpose of
applying yard and height regulations except as herein
stipulated. Signs shall be constructed of metal, plastic,
masonite, or plywood and be painted in colors that will
aesthetically fit the surroundings. Signs shall be of sound
construction so as not to be toppled by the weather.
SIGN;
A billboard, posterpanel board, painted bulletin board, or
ADVERTISING
other comamicetive device which is used to advertise
(Billboard)
products, goods and /or services, any part of which are not
solid, produced, assembled, manufactured or furnished or
otherwise related to activities conducted on the premises on
which such sign is located.
SIGN;
A sign consisting of identification numbers only, either
ADDRESS:
written or numerical form.
AVERAGE
Refers to the elevation or level of the street closest to the
GUIDE:
sign to which reference is made, measured at the street's
centerline.
AWNING:
A non -rigid hood or cover projecting from a building, which
may be folded, collapsed, or retracted against the building.
SIGN;
BALLOON:
A sign which is printed, painted or attached to a balloon.
SIGN;
A sign attached to or painted on a bench for seating while
BENCH:
waiting at a bus stop.
SIGN;
A sign relating in its subject matter to the premise on which
BUSINESS:
it is located or to products, accommodations, services or
activities thereon.
SIGN;
A sign erected on private property for the purpose of
DIRBCPICNAL:
directing vehicular and pedestrian traffic to public
facilities or functions.
SIGN;
An illuminated sign on which the artificial light is not
FLASHING.
maintained constant in intensity and color at all times in
which such sign is in use or any sign which by mechanical
means, appears to simulate a flashing sign.
SIGN;
Any sign which has characters, letters, design or outlines
ILLUMINATED:
illuminated by artificial light direct to or from the
interior of the sign.
SIGN;
A sign carrying the name of a building, its date of erection,
INTEGRAL:
monumental citations, commemorative tablets and the like when
carved into stone, concrete or similar material or made of
bronze, aluminum, or other permanent type of construction and
made an integral part of the structure.
SIGN;
Any sign placed on the interior of a window or an outside
INTERIOR
wall or within thirty six inches (36 of a window so as to
WINDW:
be viewed from the exterior of a building.
MARQUEE and /or
A roof like structure projecting from and attached to a
CANOPY:
building.
SIGN;
A sign which bears the name and /or address of the occupants
NAMEPLATE:
of a building.
2
N@7- ODNFK)M4n4G
Any advertising structure or sign which has lawfully erected
SIGN:
and maintained prior to such time as it came within the
purview of this Code, and ary amendments thereto, and which
fails to conform to all applicable regulations and
restrictions of this Code.
SIGN;
A sign which has been painted directly onto a building wall,
PAINTED WALL:
using the wall material as a base of the sign.
SIGN;
A sign not attached to the ground and designed so as to be
PORTABLE:
movable from one location to another.
SIGN;
A sign designating the current time and /or to perature and /or
PUBLIC
stock market data on the exterior of a building or pylon so
INFORMATION:
as to be viewed by the passing public from a public
right -of -way.
SIGN;
A temporary sign erected by a Realtor or private individual
REAL ESTATE:
for purposes of advertising for sale or lease a particular
building and /or parcel of property.
SIGN;
A sign which revolves or rotates on its axis by mechanical
ROTATING:
means.
SIGN;
A sign erected upon or above a roof or parapet of a building
ROOF:
or above the eaves in the case of a hip, gable or mansard
roof where the plane of the roof is less than sixty degrees
(60 ) from the horizontal.
ROOF;
The lowest plane at which the external upper covering begins.
LIMB:
STREET
Fbr purposes of this Chapter, any reference to street herein
FRONTAGE:
shall mean any street or roadway, public or private, but not
to include private driveways.
SIGN;
A banner, pennant, poster or advertising display constructed
TEMPORARY:
of cloth, canvas, plastic, sheet, cardboard, or other like
materials and intended to be displayed for a limited period
Of time.
SIGN;
A sign affixed directly to the exterior wall or screening
WALL SIGN:
surface and confined within the limits thereof and which
project from that surface less than fifteen inches (15 at
all points.
3
5-7 -2 PERMITIED AND PROHIBITED SIGNS:
(A) The following signs are permitted uses subject to the following
regulations:
1. Temporary Real Estate Signs: For the purpose of selling, renting or
leasing property. Only one (1) sign may be placed per street frontage
and one (1) sign per lake frontage on property to be sold or leased.
Such signs shall be set back a safe distance from road surface,
placement of temporary directional real estate signs shall have the
expressed consent of the owner or occupant of the abutting property.
The size of such sign shall be a maximum of six (6) square feet for
residential property and a maximum of thirty -two (32) square feet for
all other properties. Such signs shall be removed within seven (7)
days following the leasing or closing of the sale. Vacancy signs shall
be no larger than four (4) square feet.
2. Signs for Promoting and /or Selling a Development Project: For the
purpose of selling or promoting a development project of three (3) to
thirty (30) acres, three (3) signs not to exceed one hundred (100)
aggregate square feet of advertising surface may be erected on the
project site. For projects of thirty (30) acres or greater, five (5)
signs not to exceed two hundred (200) aggregate square feet of
advertising surface may be erected. Such sign shall not remain after
ninety percent (908) of the project is developed.
3. Street Banners: Street banners advertising a public entertainment or
event are permitted if specifically approved by the City Manager and in
locations designated by the City Manager. Such sign may be displayed
fourteen (14) days prior to and seven (7) days after the public
entertainment or event.
4. Teporary Signs: There shall be no more than one (1) temporary sign in
any required yard, and there shall be no more than three (3) such signs
on any lot, and the total area of such signs shall not exceed
twenty -five (25) square feet per side with a maximum of two (2) sides.
Such sign shall be displayed for no longer than thirty (30) days,
unless approved by the Zoning Officer.
5. Election Signs: Political advertising of public elections are
permitted on private property in any Zoning District with the expressed
consent of the owner or occupant of such property. Such signs may not
be posted more than sixty (60) days prior to the election and must be
removed by those responsible for the erection of the sign or the
property owner within seven (7) days following the election. Such sign
must be no larger than sixteen (16) square feet.
6. window Signs: Permanent signs printed or otherwise displayed from the
inside surface of an individual window shall not exceed two (2) square
feet or twenty -five percent (258) of the total window area, whichever
is greater.
4
(A) 7. Public Service Information Signs: Shall be allowed by conditional use
permit in "B" Districts either on pylons or on the building face. Such
sign area devoted to this shall conform to sign area and location
controls in this Chapter, but may be done in an intermittent lighting
basis subject to timing and information controls stipulated a condition
to the Conditional Use Permit.
B. On- Premise Signs: Fbr the purpose of identifying or advertising a
business, person, activity, goods, products or services located on the
premises where the sign is installed and maintained, signs shall be
regulated as set forth in Section 5 -7-4 (B) and (C).
9. Illuminated Signs: Illuminated signs shall be allowed in "B" and "I"
Districts. Such sign shall be illuminated only by steady, stationary,
shielded light sources directed solely at the sign, or internal to it,
without causing glare for motorists, pedestrians, or neighboring
premises.
10. No Trespassing Signs: No trespassing and no dumping signs shall not
exceed two (2) square feet in area per side and not to exceed four (4)
in number per lot in 'R" Districts. In " A " and "C" Districts such
signs shall not be less than three hundred feet (300') apart.
11. Off- Premises Directional Sign: Por the purpose of providing off street
direction to a residential project described in Sections 5-7 -2 (A)
described herein, or a new venture less than twelve (12) months
following occupancy permit, a public, religious or nonprofit
institution, or a use which in the determination of the Planning
Commission incurs substantial hardship from lack of reasonable
identification as a result of its location, a special use permit shall
be required. Such sign shall not exceed twenty -five (25) square feet
per face and such sign shall conform to the yard requirements of the
zoning District in which it is located. Such conditional use permit
shall be issued for one (1) year periods. In addition, a directional
sign may be permitted for any use which, in the determination of the
Planning Comission, incur substantial hardship from lack of reasonable
identification as a result of its location. If said sign is lighted,
it shall be illuminated only during those hours when business is in
operation or when the model hmhes or other developments are open for
conducting business.
12. On- Premise Directional Sign: Where one-way access and egress drives
are incorporated in a site plan, a sign indicating traffic direction no
more than four (4) square feet may be placed at a driveway within five
feet (59 of the street right- of-way and no more than four feet (4
from the average grade level. A directional sign indicating the
entrance to a two-way driveway may be approved or required where the
Zoning Administrator deems it is necessary to safely direct the
traveling public.
5
(A) 13. Interior Window Sign: Temporary signs in the show window of a business
which are part of a display of merchandise or display of merchandise or
display relating to sales on the premises, provided such signs are not
to be displayed for a period exceeding thirty (30) consecutive days.
Such sign shall not exceed seventy -five (758) of each individual window
area facing the street.
14. Awning Signs: Signs consisting of one line of letters not exceeding
nine inches (9 in height may be painted or placed upon the hanging
border only of an awning.
An identification emblem, insignia, initial, or other similar design
not exceeding eight (8) square feet in area may be painted or placed
elsewhere on an awning.
15. Balloon Signs: Such sign permitted by conditional use, with an area no
greater than forth (40) cubic feet.
16. Painted Wall Signs: Painted wall signs shall be permitted only on
structurally sound and hcmogeneous surfaces.
17. Lake Service Signss Any sign which provides a service to the lake
and /or is located within two hundred feet (200 of the lake shall be
by conditional use permit, with the exception of temporary real estate
signs. Said conditional use shall address size, location, color, and
lighting of such signs.
18. Church Signs: On premise freestanding and attached church signs shall
be permitted in any district not to exceed seventy -five (75) square
feet per side.
(B) The following signs are prohibited as prescribed:
I. Illuminated Signss Illuminated signs shall not be permitted with
the "A", "C ", and "R" Districts, with the exception of 5-7 -2 (17).
2. Rotating or laving Signs: Rotating or moving signs shall not be
permitted in any districts.
3. Plashing Signs: Flashing signs shall not be permitted in any
district.
4. Traffic Interference: No sign shall be erected that, by reason of
position, shape or color would interfere in any way with the
proper functioning or purpose of a traffic sign or signal.
5. Beacons: There shall be no use of revolving beacons, beamed
lights or similar devices that should so distract automobile
traffic as to constitute a safety hazard.
Roof Signs: Roof signs, roof advertising symbols, roof logos,
roof statues or roof sculptures shall not be permitted in any
district. No sign shall extend above the roof line.
7. Business and Advertising Signs: Such sign shall not be painted,
attached, or in any manner affixed to trees, rocks, or similar
natural surfaces, nor shall such signs be affixed to a fence or
utility pole.
8. Advertising (Billboard) Signs: Advertising (billboard) signs
shall not be permitted in wrl district.
9. public Right -of -Nays: No sign shall be upon or overhang ary
public right -of -way, with the exception of B-2 Districts where an
overhang of fifteen inches (15 is possible.
10. Bench Sign: Bench signs shall not be permitted in any district.
5-7 -3: SIGNS RBDDIRID IN ANY DISTRICTS: Before a permit shall be granted, a
minimum of one address shall be required cn each building in all
districts. Such sign shall be of sufficient size to be legible from
the street yet shall not exceed two (2) square feet in area.
5-7 -4: SIGNS IN ANY DISTRICT:
(A) Signs in "A ", " C " , and "R" Districts:
1. "A", " C " , " R-1" and "R-2" Districts: One (1) nameplate sign for
each dwelling unit. Such sign shall not exceed two (2) square
feet in area per surface, and no sign shall have more than two (2)
surfaces. NDn- conforming business uses shall be permitted one (1)
on- premises wall sign not exceeding twenty (20) square feet in
area.
2. " R - 3 " Districts: Q:e (1) nameplate sign for each dwelling group
of six (6) or more units, and such sign shall not exceed six (6)
square feet in area per surface and no sign shall have more than
two (2) surfaces.
3. One (1) nameplate sign for each permitted use or use by
conditional use permit other than residential. Such sign shall
not exceed twelve (12) square feet in area per surface. Such sign
is permitted in areas other than residential by a conditional use
permit.
4. Any nameplate sign over one (1) foot square shall be set back at
least ten feet (109 from any property line. No sign shall exceed
five feet (5 in height above the average grade level.
5. Freestanding signs shall be permitted for the purpose of permanent
identification of residential areas. At each principal entrance
to such an area a maxims of two (2) signs, not to exceed fifty
(50) square feet of sign area per sign with the exclusion of
decorative landscaping. The maximum height of such signs shall be
five feet (5 about the average grade level.
(B) Signs in the 'B' Districts:
1. The total area of signs shall not exceed twenty percent (208) of
the area of the total building front and in no case shall exceed
one hundred (100) square feet, except buildings over three
thousand (3,000) square feet of floor area may add one (1) square
foot of sign space for each one hundred (100) square feet of floor
space over three thousand (3,000) square feet. No advertising
sign shall be larger than two hundred (200) square feet in area.
2. wall Signs: She maximum number of signs on anry building shall be
one (1) identification or business sign per principal business
entrance plus one (1) overall business or identification sign per
building or shopping center center shall be allowed provided that
the combination shall not exceed the above listed one hundred
(100) square foot maximm. Such signs shall not project from the
building line more than fifteen (15 In the case of wall signs
at a shopping center, a comprehensive sign plan mist be designed
and submitted to the City, allowing no more than one (1) sign per
business.
Multiple Occupancy Building: The property owner of a multiple
occupancy building may choose an alternative signage option to the
above paragraph. The option allows one (1) business sign per
tenant. However, the total area of the combination of such signs
may )t exceed the total sign area requirements outlined in
Par qph 1. The following standards shall apply to said signs:
a. Mlltiple occupancy buildings shall submit a sign plan
conforming with this section which will coordinate signage
for the entire project.
b. Said sign plan shall address the following items: height,
location, size, number, type, basic decorative thane, design,
decor, color and material of tae signs to be placed on the
building.
C. The sign plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City
Planner or designee prior to the issuance of a sign permit
for the building. M approved permit will be issued to the
owner of the building.
d. The owner of the building is responsible to obtain the sign
permit, prescribe the approved sign criteria to all tenants
and insure that signs erected are in compliance with the
approved sign plan. (Ord. 88-11)
3. Freestanding Signs: Where a building does not cover the full area
of the property, signs may be freestanding. One (1) such sign per
a
building. The maximum height of such sign shall be twenty feet
(20 in B-1 and B-2 Districts and thirty feet (30') in B-3
Districts. In no case shall such sign be located closer than
forty feet (40 to one another. Maximum size of such sign shall
be seventy -five (75) square feet. No sign shall extend beyond a
property line, building restriction line or right- of-way line.
Such sign must be located ten feet (10') from the street
right - of-way line, with the exception of B-2 Districts where such
sign may have zero setback.
4. Area Identification for Shopping Center: An area identification
sign, stating the name of the center and the major tenants shall
be allowed. The maximum size shall be one hundred (100) square
feet per side with a maxim= height of thirty feet (30').
5. Marquee Signs: Signs may be placed on the roof of a covered walk
or marquee in a building complex on the vertical face of a marquee
and may project fran the lower edge of the marquee not more than
twenty -four inches (24 "), but the bottom of a sign placed on a
marquee shall be no less than eight feet (8') above the sidewalk
or grade at any point. No part of the sign shall extend above the
top of the roof line for a covered walk or above the top of the
vertical face of the marquee. Signs shall not be permitted
anywhere on a marquee which projects over any public right -of -way,
with the exception of B-2 Districts.
6. Portable Signs: Such signs may be used for a period not to exceed
ten (10) days and no more than three (3) times per year at one
location or for one use. The maximum size of such sign shall be
forty (40) square feet and a maximum height of ten feet (10') and
fifteen feet (15 from the street right -of -way.
7. Building overhangs in B-2 Districts may have one (1) nameplate per
business. Such sign shall be no longer than five (5) square feet.
All signs shall be homogeneous for buildings containing more than
one business.
(C) Signs in "I" Districts:
A total sign area of two (2) square feet for each lineal foot of
the building frontage shall be allowed. Such sign shall be
identification signs only. A maxiK= of one hundred (100) square
feet in area is allowed.
2. Wall Sign: The maxim= nuhber of signs on any building shall be
one (1) sign per building street frontage. Such sign shall not
cover any window or part of a window. No sign shall extend above
the roof line. No wall signs shall project from the established
building lice more than fifteen inches (159.
3. Freestanding Signs: Where a building does not cover the full area
of the property, signs may be freestanding with one (1) such sign
pnr building. The maximum height of such sign shall be twenty
9
(20) feet and in no case shall such signs be located closer than
forty (40) feet to one another. Maximum size of such sign shall
be seventy -five (75) square feet per face. No sign shall extend
beyond the property line, building restriction line or
right- of-way line. Such sign must be located ten feet (109 from
the street right- of-way line.
Portable Sign: The same regulations as for 'B• District signs
apply.
5 -7 -5: E)aMPTION: The following types of signs are exempt from all fees:
(A) Public Signs: Signs of a noncommercial nature and in the public
interest, erected by, or on the order of a public officer in the
performance of his public duty; such as directional signs, regulatory
signs, warning signs, and information signs.
(B) Temporary Signs: There shall be no more than one (1) temporary sign in
any required yard, and there shall be no more than three (3) such signs
on any lot, and the total area of such signs shall not exceed
twenty -five (25) square feet per side with a maximm of two (2) sides.
Such signs shall be displayed no longer than thirty (30) days, unless
approved by the Zoning Officer.
(C) Temporary Beal Estate Signs: For the purpose of selling, renting, or
leasing property. Only one (1) sign may be placed per street frontage
and one (1) sign per lake frontage on the property to be sold or
leased. Such signs shall be set back a safe distance from road
surface, placewnt of temporary directional real estate signs shall
have the expressed consent of the owner or occupant of the abutting
property. The size of such sign shall be a maxinm of six (6) square
feet for residential property and a maxim n of thirty -tow (32) square
feet for all other properties. Such signs shall be removed within
seven (7) days following the leasing or closing of the sale. Vacancy
signs shall be no larger than four (4) square feet.
(D) Integral: Names of buildings, dates or erection, monumental citations,
oame norative tablets and the like when carved into stone, concrete or
similar materials or made of bronze, aluminum or other permanent type
construction and made an integral pert of the structure.
(E) Anraanoanents of concerts, plays, lectures and club activities and the
like placed in the windows of consenting business. Such announcements
shall be removed no later than seven (7) days after the event.
(F) Election Signs: Political advertising of public elections are
permitted on private property in any Zoning District with the expressed
consent of the owner or occupant of such property. Such signs may not
be posted more than sixty (60) days prior to the election and must be
removed by those responsible for the erection of the sign or the
property owner within seven (7) days following the election. Such sign
must be no larger than sixteen (16) square feet. No election sign
shall be erected in any street or in the right-of -ray of any public
road. (Ord. 88-19)
10
(G) No Trespassing Signs: No trespassing and no dumping signs shall no
exceed two (2) square feet in area per side and not to exceed four (4)
in number per lot in 'R' Districts. In 'A' and 'C' Districts such
signs shall not be less than three hundred feet (300') apart.
(H) Interior Window Signs: Temporary signor in the show window of a
business which are part of a display of merchandise or display relating
to sales on the premises, provided such signs are not to be displayed
for a period exceeding thirty (30) consecutive days. Such sign will
not exceed seventy -five percent (759) of each individual window area
facing the street.
(I) on-Premises Directional Signs: Where one -way access and egress drives
are incorporated in a site plan, a sign indicating traffic direction no
more than four (4) square feet may be placed at a driveway within five
feet (5 of the street right-of -way and no more than four feet (4
from the average grade level. A directional sign indicating the
entrance to a two -way driveway may be approved or required where the
Zoning Administrator deems it is necessary to safely direct the
traveling public.
5-7-6: MON- OONFORNM SIGNS: Any sign that is nonconforming to the
requirements of this ordinance, whether by variance previously granted or by
conformance to existing sign regulations at the time the original permit for
said sign was issued, shall either be removed or brought up to code requirements
within the time period prescribed herein dating from December 8, 1980, the
effective date of this ordinance.
Amortization Schedule
8 500.00 or less
$ 500.01 to 1000.00
$1000.01 to 2500.00
Over $2500.00
2 1/2 years
3 1/2 years
4 1/2 years
5 1/2 years
5-7 -7: PERMIT RMU11 HENTS:
(A) No sign shall be erected, changed, or relocated without a permit issued
by the Zoning Officer. Any sign involving electrical components shall
be wired by a licensed electrician.
The permit application shall be signed by the applicant. When the
applicant is any person other than the owner of the property, it shall
also be signed by the owner of the property. The application shall
contain the following information:
I. None, address and telephone number of the property owner, sign
owner and erector.
11
2. Location of the sign or structure.
3. Scaled drawing showing position of the sign in relation to the
nearest buildings, structures, public streets, right -of -gays and
property lines.
4. Plans and specifications and method of construction or attachment
to the building or in the ground, including all dimensions,
showing all light sources, wattage, type and color of lights, and
details of any light shields or shades.
5. Other information as may be required by the Zoning Official.
(B) Fees:
The following schedule of fees for sign permits is established:
1. Forty (40) square feet or less in area; $25.00.
2. Greater than forty (40) square feet in area; $.25 per additional
square foot over 25 square feet.
3. Signs which need a conditional use permit must pay the established
sign permit fee plus such additional fee as may be required for
the conditional use permit.
No fee shall be required for signs exempted by Section 5 -7 -5.
Fees may be waived by the City Council for signs containing a
religious, civic, school or public interest subject. (Ord. 84-06)
5 -7 -8: CANCELLATION: A sign permit shall become null and void if the
work for which the permit was issued has not been completed within
a period of six (6) months after the date of the permit. A permit
may be renewed one (1) time and no additional fee shall be
collected for the renewal.
5 -7 -9: REMOVAL OF SIGNS: The Zoning Officer shall order the removal of
any sign erected or maintained in violation of this ordinance.
Thirty (30) days notice in writing shall be given to the owner of
the building, structure or premises on which such sign is located,
to either bring the sign into compliance with the ordinance or
effect its removal.
5 -7 -10: FINES: Any person, organization, corporation, or their
representatives found in violation of this Chapter shall be guilty
of a misdemeanor and upon conviction, shall be punished by a fine
of not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500.00) or by imprisonment
for not more than ninety (90) days, or both. Each day that a
violation exists shall constitute a separate and distinct offense,
punishable as aforesaid.
12
5 -7 -11: APPEALS: 1b provide for a reasonable interpretation of the
provisions of this Chapter, a permit applicant who wishes to
appeal an interpretation by the City Zoning officer may file a
notice of appeals with the Planning Oammission and request a
hearing. The Commission shall hear appeals or requests by the
following cases:
Appeals where it is alleged that there is an error in any order,
requirement, decision or determination made by the Zoning Officer
in the enforcement of this Chapter.
Request for variances from the literal provisions of this Chapter
in instances where their strict enforcement would cause an endue
hardship.
5 -7 -12: SWERANCE CLAUSE: If any section, clause or provision or portion
thereof of this Chapter shall be found to be invalid or
unconstitutional by arty court of competent jurisdiction, such
decision shall not affect any other section, clause, provision, or
Portion thereof of this Chapter.
5 -7 -13: REV= PERMIT: The Zoning Officer is authorized and empowered to
revoke any permit upon failure of the holder of said permit
thereof to oamply with any provisions of this Chapter.
5 -7 -14: MAR MMiCE: All signs shall be maintained in a safe, presentable
and good structural condition at all times. Maintenance shall
include painting, repainting, cleaning, replacement or repair of
defective parts and other necessary acts.
Any sign which is found in a dangerous or defective condition,
shall be removed or repaired by the owner of the sign or the owner
of the premises on which the sign is located.
(Ord. 80-6, 12 -8-80)
13
This ordinance shall beome effective fran and after its passage
and publication.
Passed by the Council this 11th day of May , 1983.
Michael McGuire Walter Stock
City Manager Mayor
Published in the City of Prior rake Daily American on this _ day of
, 1983.
Prepared by:
LaMn, Nelson, Sullivan B Cole, P.A.
Attorneys for the City of Prior Lake
1120 TCF Tower
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
(612) 339 -8131
14
�\ \ \
Americai
Z" yi
*W
till,
�\ \ \
Americai
Chapter 1. Substantive Issues in
Sign Regulation
Sign regulation is more an art than a science. It is an art
that requires a careful balancing of the need of businesses
and others to communicate with the public with the need of
the public to receive that communication and with commu-
nity planning goals related to streetscape aesthetics and traf-
fic safety. Thus, there is no ideal system of sign regulation.
Communities have broad legal authority to regulate signs
based on safety or aesthetic considerations, or both. How
they exercise that authority is a policy determination that
each community must make on its own.
Each community must address sign control in a way that
is appropriate to that community. Signs in Las Vegas and
Reno are a modern version of an Art Deco art form. The
Circus Circus clown and the lights of the downtown casinos
are an important part of the glitz that is Las Vegas. Many
casinos have animated signs, consisting mostly of lights and,
sometimes, covering more square feet than the land area the
casinos occupy. Las Vegas without its lights and signs would
simply not be Las Vegas. In vivid contrast, some relatively
exclusive residential communities prohibit all signs except
wooden painted signs that are Floodlit (not too brightly),
with no moving parts; some even limit the colors of paint
that can be used. The golden arches in such communities
may be little more than a mustard -colored shape painted on
wood.
The needs and desires of most communities lie somewhere
in between the two extremes. The model sign ordinance that
appears in Chapter 3 of this report is designed for such com-
munities. Because it is comprehensive in scope, it may be
somewhat longer than models that have appeared else-
where. It is intended to address some issues that other
models and types of regulation systems have failed {o con-
sider. For instance, some earlier models offer provisions that
regulate, in part, on the basis of sign content. Such regula-
tions can cause significant legal and practical problems, an
issue discussed in Chapter 2 of this report. Despite the
model's comprehensiveness, it has been designed to be easy
to use and administer.
The model ordinance also offers an alternative to other
approaches to sign regulation. The Street Graphics system,
described in a book of tke same name,' is a far more
sop'iisticated system of aesthetic controls. That system ad-
dresses most of the issues discussed in the model and also in-
cludes controls on the actual design of signs and sign
messages. Because of its sophistication and the resulting
complexity of administration, the Street Graphics system
will not work for every community.
Some communities will also be able to regulate signs with
a far simpler code than the model here. They might start
with the model in this report and simply delete those provi-
sions not relevant to their needs.
Before offering the model, however, this report discusses
the major substantive issues in sign regulation, ranging from
issues affecting sign location and design to such management
issues as enforcement of sign regulations and control of signs
that were erected legally bat that do not conform to current
regulations. Chapter 2 presents a simplified legal analysis of
the major issues in sign regulation. The final chapter con-
tains the model sign ordinance, with commentary explain-
ing many of the provisions.
SIGN DESIGN AND STRUCTURE
Sign regulations typically group signs in classifications,
such as "ground signs, "'pole signs;' and "wall signs." Just
as zoning ordinances provide different rules for different
uses, sign regulations oftea provide different rules for dif-
ferent classifications of signs. Thus, understanding the
similarities and differentn among the groups into which
signs are classified is a keyso understanding sign regulation.
The classification system for signs is usually based on sign
design and structure. Thesign groups described in this sec-
tion of the report are common, but local definitions of these
groups vary. Thus, the descriptions given here are il-
lustrative, not definitive; model definitions are provided in
the model ordinance.
The most basic distinctim for signs concerns whether they
are permanent or temporary. Permanent signs are generally
as permanent as a small bitgding; that is, they are set on their
1_ Daniel R. MandelkerandMam R. Ewald, Jr.. Sm stGraphic, and
the loo+, rev. ad. (Chiogo: Anariran Planning As xlation, 1998).
own foundation, sunk into the ground, or permanent[
fastened to, or pa, :ed on, a permanent structure. Scent
local sign regulations permit only permanent signs Mosto�
the specific sign classifications discussed below fall under!"(
general heading of permanent signs.
Temporary signs, on the other hand, are sometime
defined only as signs that are not permanent. They mcluct
such signsas sandwich boards, papersigns in grocery story
windows. banners stretched across the front of a store arc:
those placed on small trailers. Regulations that attempt t,
define temporary signs in detail often specifically list then
signs. A problem with such lists is that they inevitabl% ea'<i
room for creative but unwanted advernsmg device, 1'..�
tethered balloon that have the shape of a logo or cFaractt
used for advertising.
Some regulations prohibit temporary signs other* a
tempt to impose strict limits on the length of time that sucf
signs can be displayed. Because they are easily moved, term
porary signs pose particular enforcement Problems And
because the% are relatively inexpensive temporary su: st
wmetime, heavdyused, treat ing a clutt Bred streetsca,e .'
is not unusual to find two. three oreven moreportable arc
other temporary signs supplementing a pole sign and large
wall sign in front of a business — particularly in front of con-
venience stores, service stations, and fast -food outlets.
Permanent signs are usually further classified. The
classifications provided in the following paragraphs include
those most commonly found in local sign regulations. Al-
though specific terms may vary slightly (for example, "low-
(Top) This low. solid sign with oily estenor lighting is the
primary ident hcapon sign fora malor shopping Ceti ter m a
community with resinctive sign regulations (Bottom) This roof
sign dwarfs the single -story building it sits on, it is indeed
Bigger Than You Eve. Imagined Many communities prohibit
signs eatendmg above the roof line m many or all districts
profile signs' instead of ground signs "), the concepts do not.
Many local sign regulations contain other classifications,
such as address signs, nameplates, real estate signs, and con-
struction signs. Those are classifications based on sign con-
tent. The distinction in many regulations between on-
premises and off - premises signs, usually used to limit bill-
boards, is also a content -based classification —an issue
that will be discussed more fully later in this chapter.
Pale Signs
Pole signs are signs that are supported by a pole
(sometimes more than one) and otherwise separated from
the ground by air. Pole signs are almost always separate
from buildings and other structures.
Ground Signs
The entire bottom of a ground sign is generally in contact
with or in close proximity to the ground. Like pole signs,
ground signs are separate from buildings.
Freestanding Signs
Some local regulations simply group pole signs and
ground signs into the simpler classification, "freestanding
signs."
Wall Signs
Definitions of wall signs vary significantly. Virtually all
such definitions include signs that are painted on or attached
Flush with a structural wall of a building. Some definitions
(Top) Permanent signs affixed to buildings or poles ale often far
less intrusive on the urban streetscape than portable.
temporary, and other easily installed signs, like this balloon.
(Bottom) This temporary sign detracts from an otherwise
relatively uncluttered streetscape that includes a low pole sign
and a logo made of flowers.
-1
in the ordinance sign size limitations tied to building floor
area.
Parked Vehicles With Messages
Some proprietors park vehicles with signs on them in
front of their businesses. Such vehicles may range from
autos with signs on top, to school buses with billboards at-
tached, to trailers with messages on their sides. Without
stepping into the separate and complicated problem of reg-
ulating advertising on vehicles in general, the problem of
advertising on permanently parked vehicles can be ad-
dressed through broad definitions of "sign" or through
specific provisions. One effective approach to the
stationary- vehicle problem is to exempt from regulation as
a sign vehicles "regularly and customarily used to transport
persons or property for the business." Some communities
have abandoned - vehicle regulations, which prohibit the
parking in pubic view of any vehicle not in operating con-
dition and /or lacking current registration; such a regulation
effectively addresses the issue of parked vehicles used as
signs.
Snipe Signs
. Snipe signs are signs fastened totrasor poles. Few com-
munities have effective enforcement systems for such signs,
and most prohibit them. Because most sign regulations are
drafted to allow certain signs and prohibit all others, many
regulations essentially prohibit snipe signs without defining
them.
SIGN DIMENSIONS, NUMBER, AND LOCATION
It is necessary to classify signs so that they can be
regulated on the basis of their characteristics. The most im-
portant aspects of sign regulation are similar to the lot and
building dimensional requirements of a zoning ordinance—
limiting the size and number of signs and the location of each
sign on the lot or building.
There are a surprising number of possible approaches to
these apparently simple numerical concepts. The most im-
portant are discussed here.
Individual Sign Size
Probably the most common restriction on signs is a limit
on the size of individual signs. That is a valid and important
restriction for aesthetic and safety reasons. Planners draft-
ing sign regulations, however, sometimes ignore the diffi-
culty of monitoring and enforcing restrictions on the sizes
of individual signs. Although large pole signs may require
construction permits of some sort, many other signs an
erected, installed, or painted without any local permit,
whether one is required or not. Thus, enforcing the size re-
striction requires an after - the -fact measuring of a device that
is sometimes large and in an awkward location, such as on
top of a pole or a roof.
This problem is complicated in local regulations that
specify a variety of different size limits on different types of
signs, often based on sign content. Although the size of
freestanding signs is an important issue, and one that is ad-
dressed in the model ordinance, the size of individual wall
signs is not the most important standard for regulation. The
total area of all wall signs and the percentage of each building
surface covered are far more important and are both ad-
dressed in the model ordinance.
Defining what constitutes the measurable area of a sign
also raises some problems. However, the definition of sign
area in the model ordinance —a definition based on common
practice — effectively resolves those problems. Measurable
area is defined as the area within the outer boundaries of
standard geometrical shapes (primarily squares, rectangles,
and circles) containing and defined by the extreme reaches
of informational or graphic parts of the signs. Note the enor-
mous difference between this approach and the approach
advocated by some in the sign industry, which is that signs
with large letters should be measured by determining the
total of the areas covered by the individual letters, disregard-
ing supporting graphics and surrounding and separating
spaces.
Total Sign Area Limits
Sophisticated local sign regulations include total limits on
sign area on a particular property. Some regulations have
sire limit for all freestanding signs on a property and another
mit for the total signage on the property, or a separate limit
,r all signs that are not freestanding.
For reasons discussed below, total sign area limits are a far
-lore effective way to limit signage than attempts to limit the
r. umber of all types of signs. Total sign aree limits can be a
function of lot area, street frontage, building area, or some
combination thereof. Some regulations provide a formula
based on lot area or frontage but with an additional limit tied
to building area. A system that relates both to lot size and
to building size is typically the most responsive t- aesthetic
concerns. Such facilities as drive - through banks and
restaurants are often small buildings located on large lots;
al`>wing the same amount of signage on such buildings as
w -_ Ad be allowed on atypical commercial building on the
same site can yield a building that is all sign.
Note that sign area limits tied to building size can effec-
tiveiy eliminate many billboard problems because most
billboards are located on lots where no building exists. As
for billboards located on lots in industrial districts —where
there will be a building on the lot and space for the
billboard —sign size should be limited to a small percentage
of building Boor area, and those limits alone may be enough
to prevent billboards in most such locations.
Area limits tied to lot dimensions ca,,. aise administrative
questions in many communities because several subdivided
lots are often covered by one commercial building or use.
That problem is easily resolved by defining `zone lot," as the
model ordinance in this report does.
Limits on the Number of Signs
Most local sign regulations limit the number of freestand-
ing signs. That is a logical regulation to prevent clutter, and
it is easy to enforce. Some regulations tie the numerical limit
to the number of streets on which the property has frontage,
thus allowing two signs on a corner lot. Others tie the
number of signs to the number of driveways, a somewhat
capricious limitation. The better approach is generally to tie
the number of freestanding signs to the number of fat of lot
frontage. Sir x the issue is street clutter, frontage rather than
lot area is the better measure.
Those concerned with sign regulates, n should be aware of
one commercial issue affecting the number of freestanding
signs. Some national manufacturers and franchisers, whose
logo signs are very valuable to inch. idual merchants, require
that sucF logo signs be installed on separate poles and not
stacked r n a pole with other signs. That poses a practical
probler, for auto dealers and others who handle multiple
lines o name " products, each requiring a separate
freestanding sign. Although local governments need not
cater to the dictates of large national companies, they must
be sensitive to the Fact that the local Chevrolet -Honda dealer
probably does not have enough bargaining power to per-
suade either manufacturer to change its requirements. Since
multibrand auto dealers are likely to have large expanses of
street frontage, a limit for freestanding signs that is based on
street frontage should be responsive to that problem.
Limits on the number of wall signs and similar signs can
become difficult to define, administer, and enforce. Depend-
ing on the definition, a stacked sign that says "Mini Mart
Foods" and that includes a gasoline company logo below it
maybe considered one or two signs. The problem is hardly
worth solving because the real issue is how much wall area
is covered by the signs. Thus, the model ordinance does not
include limits on the number of wall signs, window signs,
ar j door signs. Although that may result in some walls ap-
pearing more cluttered than others, some sign designers are
capable of making even a single sign seem clutr red. For
those who wish to regulate aesthetic details of sign design,
the Street Graphics system provides an excellent approach.
Location
Location is an issue mostly for freestanding signs. The
most common locational requirement is a setback require-
ment from the front property line. Other local regulations
may require a setback from side or rear property lines or
may specify some relationship between the sign and the
building. Provisions of sign or zoning regulations may pro-
hibit signage, as well as fences and buildings, from being
located in a "clear -site triangle,"" which is typically an isos-
celes triangle with two 25 -foot sides extending from the street
comer along the curbs; some communities refine this limit
to include the area required for visibility from autos, which
is from roughly two feet above the ground to nine or 10 feet
above the ground.
Some local regulations make sign location and height
dependent variables, typically allowing lower signs to be
placed closer to the street. Such a regulation provides an in-
centive for merchants to reduce sign height, thus reducing
the elevation —and perhaps the intrusiveness —of street cut-
ter. The varying heights and setbacks that will occur under
such a regulaton can also eliminate the problem of rows of
signs obstructing the visibility of one another.
Local sign regulations sometimes require additional set-
backs for signs in residential areas or impose special restric-
tions, such as subdued lighting and reduced height, on signs
located within specified distances of residential property.
Sign Height
The height of freestanding signs is an important issue in
streetscape aesthetics. Sign heights are often stunning to the
casual observer. One wag once suggested to the author that
sign companies are in the business of selling poles, not signs.
There are significant ironies involved in the tall signs that dot
many commercial areas. An ideal sign height for auto
visibility on a city street with a 35- mile -per -hour speed limit
is a height that puts a sign comfortably within tine windshield
The CCB sign would be treated as a roof sign under most local regulations because the sign strucrure appears to be
separate from the building, whereas the first federal sign is a wall sign.
Barmen
Many local sign regulations prohibit banners, which were
once most commonly used as supplemental, temporary
signs with such messages as "Big Sale" or "Picnic Supplies
Here." Today, many arts groups and some cities, civic
groups, and commercial organizations use artistic and
decorative banners, often with no specific message, to give
a festive appearance to a plaza, street, mall, or other public
or quasi - public space.
There are several possible approaches to regulatingban-
ners. One is certainly a ban, although such a ban should be
carefully considered in light of the possible uses just outlined.
Another approach is to allow banners only as temporary
signs on public property when they promote events of
general civic interest, subject to a special permitting process.
Such an approach creates some legal hazards, which arc
discussed in Chapter 2, but it is one that often best responds
to the real desires of a community. One local sign regulation
expressly allows banners that are attached top and bottom
(or two sides) to permanent structural members on post or
building erected for another purpose, provided that the ban-
ners have no logo or message on them. That rule allows the
attachment of decorative banners to lightpolesand buildings.
but precludes their use as signs.
This convenience store has three "temporary" Fanner signs, each of which is larger than the permanent sign on the
store. The model ordinance would allow only one such sign and then only for truly semporary use
Prohibitions of porraHe signs as a
solution to the problem of visual
Light ra a toumrruuuty hate been
upheld by the courts Tlus vgn,
like marry portable signs . is more
than lust ugly —as message rs
lost due to rrussutg letters. v
missing dec anal point . colliding
letters . and ronfusnrg tenus
These signs are not parncuiarl y large in an absolute sense, but they are very large m proportion to the building
The model ordinance provides size limits related to building size and lot frontage
Sign clutter is one of (he biggest streetscape problems in many communities. In one Case (top). Clutter on an
individual site is so bad that the building a obliterated" by its own sign rge. In another (opposite page). signs
overlap down the strip. making sign copy difficult, if not impossible, to read.
Groups like neighborhood organizations use banners to
promote businesses and activities and to give a festive air to the
local area. Any ban of such signs should be carefully considered
in light of their possible civic and artistic uses.
ENFORCEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION
Enforcing and administering sign regulations is in some
ways more difficult than enforcing and administering zon-
ing regulations. Zoning administration is closely tied to the
building permit process— anyone putting up a building in-
forms public officials that he or she is doing so by applying
for a building permit. It is then easy to review the plans for
the proposed construction to determine whether the building
will comply with applicable regulations and to track the con-
struction for conformance with approved plans.
In contrast, many types of signs in many communities do
not require permits. Some types of signs that do require per-
mits may be erected by individual property owners or
tenants without complying with a permit process. Although
building inspectors are very likely to notice a new building
going up without a permit, signs on buildings and some
freestanding signs may be added orchanged without attract -
Ing the attention of any official. Even when a sign is erected
or installed in substantial compliance with regulations, the
measurements required in many local sign regulations are
usually more complex than those required by the zoning
regulations for buildings on the same lot.
The enforcement problems with signs generally do not in-
volve large signs provided by sign companies. Many com-
munities license sign contractors and require permits for
large signs. Like building contractors, most sign contractors
will not work without required permits and have no desire
to install signs that will violate local regulations. Thus, that
aspect of sign regulation, like zoning, can be self- policing.
The regulation of banners, portable signs, pennants, painted
wall signs, and small signs of all kinds can be much more
difficult.
Many communities make sign enforcement even more
difficult by adopting regulations that are far too complex to
be easily enforced. Regulations that impose different size
limits on different types of freestanding signs in the same
location require endless measurements. Regulations that tie
sign sizes to lot areas and street frontages require additional
measurements and calculations. There is nothing especially
complicated about any particular set of measurements or
calculations —the problem is simply one of having enough
staff to do the job. Regulations based on sign content create
even more problems of enforcement and administration
because inspectors must monitor sign copy as well as dimen-
sions and location.
There are three key steps that a community can take to
make the enforcement and administration of sign regulation
efficient.
1. Keep Regulations Simple. Simple regulations are sim-
ple to administer. The model ordinance in this report
has been drafted with that concept in mind.
2. Establish Records. The model ordinance includes a re-
quirement for a master sign permit in order to keep a
record of what signs are permitted on each zone lot
and in what locations. Such a record eliminates the
need to recalculate permissible sign numbers and sign
areas because those are all reflected on the permit.
Field administration becomes matter of comparing
what is on the site with what is on the permit. In many
cases, the differences, such as the addition of an extra
pole sign or the enlargement of a wall sign, will be ob-
vious on initial inspection without the need for
detailed measurements.
3. Hire Adequate Staff. A community that adopts a
policy of effective regulation of signs should hire ade-
quate staff to do the job. There is some reason to con-
sider separating that staff from the building inspection
staff if the latter is often overworked. Any rational
department administrator faced with a personnel
shortage and a decision about whether to inspect
buildings under construction or to conduct random
sign surveys will order his or her staff to inspect the
buildings. Thus, signs may always remain on the "to
be done" list. If one or more inspectors arc assigned
specifically to sign inspection duties, that problem will
be eliminated.
Although the enforcement and administration of sign
regulations raises issues different from general zoning en-
forcement, it is certainly related to zoning enforcement and
administration. Thus, the two should be part of one total
system, even if certain pars (such as inspections) function
separately!
e. Fora general discuWOn of enforcement of landdusecontrob, lnduding
sign «gdatioru, are Eric Damian Kelly, Enforcing Zoning and fad -Use
Contro4, Planning Advisory Service Repro No. aoe (Chicago: Amedcan
Plarming Assocladon, Ieeg).
15
("C R ENT
_eszVI ozc
np,
Chapter 1. Sign Regulations
Courts generally agree that the regulation of signs is
within the purview of the police power. Signs, if im-
properly constructed, located, or concentrated in large
numbers can be hazardous to public health, safety, and
welfare. A sign left unregulated can be a fire hazard,
dangerous in high winds, a health hazard, a cause of gar-
bage accumulation, an obstruction of light and air,
and a traffic hazard by distracting a driver's attention
from the road. Traditionally the courts have found these
arguments legitimate justification for regulating signs.
In the past two decades, municipalities have begun to
cite aesthetics and preservation of property values as
additional justification for regulating signs. Most courts
accept the argument that the appearance of a sign can
have an impact on property values and therefore can be
regulated because the preservation of property values is
clearly an objective of zoning. In many cases, however,
the courts have had trouble accepting the aesthetics/
property value rationale as the sole rationale for regula-
tion. Therefore, most ordinances tie the aesthetics argu-
ment to the more traditional arguments of health, safety,
and welfare. How communities do this is discussed in
the Statement of Purpose section of the report. (See
Chapter 2.)
But if aesthetic criteria are included, a committee can
be formed to review the proposed sign for compati-
bility with the character of the district; the relationship
of the sign's appearance to the appearance of the build-
ing; its impact on existing neighboring signs; and the
appearance of the sign itself. The power of these sign
review commissions ranges from strictly advisory to
actually issuing permits for construction.
THE ON- PREMISES /OFF - PREMISES DISTINCTION
The signs discussed in this report will be on- premises
or, more commonly, business signs. (See the May, 1980,
PAS Memo for a discussion of off - premises sighs [bill-
boards).) The legal distinction is important. On- premises
signs cannot be totally prohibited, especially in commer-
cial districts. Usually business signs are considered ac-
cessory to the use already permitted in the zoning ordi-
nance and, therefore, can be regulated as part of the per-
mitted land use.
Since no other form of communication is available,
and because the public benefits from commercial speech,
the courts have ruled that business signs can be regulated
but not totally banned from a community. To prohibit
signs would be a violation of the property owners
First Amendment right to free speech. Another factor pre-
venting a total ban on signs is the court finding that busi-
ness signs represent the sole means of identification and
advertisement for many businesses.
Billboards are not usually considered an accessory to
a permitted use. Because they arc freestanding, and their
content is not related to the structure to which it is at-
tached, billboards are considered a distinct business,
This distinction provides the basic argument allowing
total bans on billboards when the same is not possible
for on- premises signs. Since billboards can be treated dif-
ferently than business signs, most billboards are dealt
with in a separate section of the sign ordinance.
REGULATIONS AND ADMINISTRATION
Although many courts continue to disagree on the ex-
tent of billboard regulations, on- premises sign controls
are fairly standard and generally accepted by the courts.
Most sign ordinances contain specific permitted and pro-
hibited signs in each of the four main categories of land
use— residential, commercial, industrial, and rural/
agricultural. Setbacks from streets, parks, and exits;
height and area limitations; and requirements concerning
materials and illumination are typical limitations im-
posed by communities. The use of immoral or indecent
words is usually prohibited. Certain classes of signs,
such as Bags, banners, and portable and temporary
signs, will frequently receive special treatment.
Ordinances also provide administrative procedures,
including requirements that construction and mainte-
nance permits be obtained and fees be paid before signs
are erected. The holder of the permit is subject to the
COURT TESTS
The rationale used for evaluating the validity of a sign
ordinance varies among state courts. California's courts,
for example, tend to accept ordinance regulations whose
justification relies solely upon aesthetics and the preser-
vation of property values. Illinois courts, on the other
hand, do not recognize aesthetics as a legitimate sole
justification for sign control and require municipalities
to demonstrate the more traditional health and safety
justifications for sign regulation.
This diversity in court opinion makes a careful scru-
tiny of state enabling legislation and previous court de.
cisions a necessity for any community attempting to de-
sign and implement a new sign code. In general, however.
the court test used by a U.S. District Court in Sign
Builders. Inc. v. City of Tuscaloosa IU.S.District Court,
Alabama, August 18, 19771 is fairly representative of
how courts evaluate a sign ordinance. The court asked:
1. Does the ordinance attempt to regulate the content
of commercial advertising?
2. Are other means of advertising available?
3. Does the ordinance adequately relate to public
health, safety, and wc1fare7
regulations detailed in the ordinance. Further, the per-
mit usually has an expiration date, with no automatic
provisions for renewal.
The ordinance must provide standards for the issuance
or denial of a permit. To give this discretionary power
to an administrator would be an unjustifiable delegation
of the legislative power, Further, any person or organi-
sation that feels they have been unjustly denied a permit
can sue the municipality. In the past, such suits have
usually charged violation of the First Amendment right
to free speech; violation of Fourteenth Amendment
rights to equal protection; and improper use of the police
power resulting in a taking of property without just
compensation.
The fee charged for a permit varies among localities,
The Supreme Court of the United States, in St. Louis
Poster Advertisement Co. v. St. Louis 1249 U.S. 269
(1919)), has indicated that a high in geared toward
limiting the number of signs is not unreasonable. States,
however, differ substantially on what they consider
reasonable. As with all police power regulations, it is up
to the person questioning the reasonableness of the ordi-
nance to show that the fee is unreasonable, arbitrary,
or discriminatory.
The first two questions are asked to protect the sigi.
owners' freedom of speech. The third c restion is asked
to determine if the purpose and extent of the ordinance
qualifies as the proper use of municipal police power.
What these tests illustrate is a shifting in the basis for liti-
gation of sign controls. In the past, the regulation of
signs has been viewed as a land -use question. In the last
few years, however, sign owners are beginning to ques-
tion the validity of certain sign controls in relation to
rights guaranteed by the first and fourteenth amend-
ments to the U.S. Constitution. This emphasis on the
violation of federally guaranteed rights means that plan-
ners must study federal as well as state court decisions.
At present, however, state courts and land -use questions
continue to dominate the field of sign control litigation.
AUTOMATIC AMENDMENT PROCEDURE
Even with the best of intentions, a sign ordinance may
have unanticipated results and prove to be a hardship to
a large number of sign owners. To forestall that possi-
bility, the San Diego city council read into the minutes
of the meeting in which the sign ordinance was passed
a resolution putting the entire ordinance up for re-
view and requiring a public hearing in two years. At
the time of the hearing, requests for variances submitted
over the two years will be studied to determine if certain
segments of the ordinance are too restrictive or, possi-
bly, arbitrary. It will also give the public another oppor-
tunity to voice their concern over specific aspects of the
ordinance that they feel are unfair. Inserting such an
automatic amendment procedure into the minutes of the
meeting reduces the likelihood of the municipality being
sued for lack of due process. It makes the ordinance flex-
ible and provides administrative recourse for those who
think that the ordinance is too restrictive or that it does
not provide equal protection.
Most cities achieve the removal of nonconforming signs
through the creation of an amortization schedule,
Chapter 2. Ordinance Components
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
The initial component of any sign ordinance should
be a statement of purpose. The statement of purpose has
several functions. First, it explains to the reader the phi-
losophy behind the regulations, as well as the ordinance
goals. More important, it assures the courts that the
public interest is being served in an acceptable manner.
As mentioned in the previous section, acceptable
rationales are expanding. Most ordinances, however,
continue to rely, at least in part, on the traditional
health, safety, and welfare arguments associated with
the police power.
Ho4 ms'` weight is placed on aesthetics and property
value otection —as compared to health and
safety- will depend largely upon the goals and the na-
ture of tb. • community. For example, communities with
a su: sta- :i: l tourist industry, or with great natural
beaj,y, can and do place a greater emphasis on the aes-
thehi argument than communities lacking these features.
The length and content of the statement of purpose
should reflect the complexity and goals of the
ordinance. The Battle Creek, Michigan, ordinance is
brief, relying primarily on the safety aspect of the police
power as justification for regulation:
Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to permit
such signs that will not, by their reason, size, loca-
tion, construction, or manner of display, endanger
the public safety of individuals, confuse, mislead, or
obstruct the vision necessary for traffic safety, or
otherwise endanger public health, safety, and
morals; and to permit and regulate signs in such a
way as to support and complement land -use objec-
tives set forth in the zoning ordinance. (Ord. No.
979, adopted 10.9 -79.1
In some cases, where unique concerns exist, munici-
pallties have been inclined to develop lengthy statements
of purpose explaining the philosophy behind their regu-
lations. Palm Springs, California, is such a city. Palm
Springs recognized the importance of maintaining the
attractive appearance of the city to protect the city's
prime industry — tourism. As signs are a prominent part
of a city's landscape, control of their appearance, num-
ber, and location is important. The Palm Springs ordi-
nance explains this connection fully in the purpose sec-
tion of its sign ordinance. Following are some excerpts
from this statement:
Purpose. The purpose of this ordinance is to allevi-
ate a growth of sign usage that is detrimental to Palm
Springs. Recognizing that Palm Springs is one of the
country's foremost desert resorts, this council finds
that the improper control of signs causes a particular
problem here. Although there is more to this city
than its resort resources, the attraction and servicing
of visitors constitute one of our leading economic
activities. Any failure to recognize this significant
fact would blind us to the realities of our responsi-
bilities as councilmen. The visitors and investor's
impression of Palm Springs determines the success
or failure of our economic future. We must make
certain that what is seen is inviting and appreciated
by both visitors and investors.
Having spent over six months in studying the many
ramifications of sign usage, we realize that there is
a myriad of public and private interests to be
weighed in the balance. We have done this. We
have carefully listened to everyone who wished to
speak. In now culminating our effort, we are of the
opinion that economic and aesthetic factors are in-
separable. Each is but part of the same problem. Any
attempt to separate them distorts the picture. We
recognize and strongly subscribe to the right of bush
nessmen to advertise their businesses. Still, the right
to advertise must be kept within reasonable bound-
aries consistent with the objectives and goals of the
community to retain its special character and the
economic advantages that rest largely on the quality
of its appearance. We realize that reasonable minds
do differ as to how the sign problem can best be
solved. The responsibility for finding the solutions,
however, falls upon this body.
The section goes on to cite such factors as the visual in-
compatibility of signs with their surroundings; an over-
abundance of signs causing clutter; the lack of quality in
design and construction; and the substantial number of
illegal signs as reasons for stringent control.
Based upon the foregoing, we conclude that the use
of signs should be limited to naming the business,
the nature of the use being conducted on the pre-
mises, or the product, service, or interest being of-
fered for sale or lease thereon.
The council declares rate signs to be a public nuisance
and provides the following rationale:
To begin with, rate signs are more difficult to regu-
late because of the element of false advertising that
inevitably creeps in. They invite cut - throat compe-
tition. Rate signs constitute hard -core commercial-
ism, which is all right in some places. It is out of
place, however, in a desert resort which seeks to
relieve its visitors from the steady pressure of the
daily grind. Palm Springs must be guarded against
the bargain - basement image, the impression of a
going - out -of- business -sale operation which stems
from the use of such signs.
Rate signs are less desirable for still other reasons.
They serve a different purpose. They do not locate
a business, thereby guiding customers to the pre-
mises. They do not advertise the products or ser-
vices available. They do not tie together the name,
goods, or services and location in a way that can
build good will, high regard, and a favorable repu-
tation, They do not advance the economic stability,
but rather they tend to undermine and reduce it.
Therefore, in sum, we must conclude that signs that
are too large, too many, too out of keeping with
surroundings, or too commercial are detrimental to
the general welfare of the people of Palm Springs.
Furthermore, the public safety is jeopardized by so-
called signboard alleys and neon jungles because
they tend to overattract the attention of motorists
from the road hazards. Also, a honkytonk commu-
nity attracts the mote undesirable elements, thereby
creating greater police problems. Economic, com-
mercial, and social downgrading, clutter, confu-
sion, and crime give rise to other health and safety
problems. These pressures may not be Immediately
apparent, but, in evaluating a city's future, they
each subtly contribute to definite deterioration
trends. For these reasons, the following regulations
are deemed by us to be imperative. [Ord. No. 776,
adopted Feb. 14, 1967.1
Initially the drafters assert that Palm Spring's appear-
ance has a direct impact on property values in the com-
munity and that signs, as currently regulated, are detri.
mental to the city's appearance. Citing months of study
and public hearings as support for this conclusion, they
propose stringent control of signs. By indicating studies
and public hearings in the statement of purpose; the city
is providing its brief to the courts.
Donald Hagman in his book, Urban Planning and
Land Development Control Law, indicates that some
courts will look for a rationale in addition to aesthetics:
Some courts see preservation of property values as
separate from aesthetic purpose. They will sustain
regulations on the ground that while aesthetics
alone is not a sufficient rationale, aesthetics plus
some other police power purpose is. 1P. 141.1
The Palm Springs ordinance uses the preservation of
property values and the health and safety of its residents
as the additional justification.
SIGN DEFINITIONS AND CLASSIFICATIONS
Following the statement of purpose, many municipal-
ities choose to define the term "sign," as well as the vari-
ous types of signs regulated in the ordinance. Typically,
the purpose of this section is to clarify terms where con.
fusion or misinterpretation are possible. Occasionally
this section will also be used to identify signs that will be
permitted or prohibited in all areas of the community.
Frederick H. Bair, in Planning Cities, suggests this ap-
proach of combining definition and regulation. By pre-
senting the definitions and exempting certain signs from
regulation early in the ordinance, repetitive language
can be avoided in the remaining sections of the docu-
ment. Bair suggests the following as an illustration of
such a multipurpose sign definition:
Sign. Any device designed to inform or attract the
attention of persons not on the premises on which
the sign is located, provided, however, that the fol-
lowing shall not be included in the application of
the regulations herein:
1. Signs not exceeding one square foot in area
and bearing only property numbers, post box
numbers, or names of occupants of premises.
2. Flags and insignia of any government, except
when displayed in connection with commer-
cial promotion.
3. Legal notices, identification information, or
directional signs erected by governmental
bodies.
4. Integral decorative or architectural features of
buildings, except letters, trademarks, moving
parts, or moving lights.
5. Sips directing and guiding traffic and parking
on private property, but bearing no advertis-
ing matter. [P. 249.1
Most communities follow Bair s suggestion of identi-
fying permitted and prohibited signs near the beginning
of the ordinance, but they tend to separate their sign
gress, which signs shall not excee
square feet in area.
(2) The following signs are permitted (in any use
district), but require a permit as provided herein:
(a) Signs or bulletin boards customarily inci-
dent to places of worship, libraries, mu-
seums, social clubs, or societies, which signs
or bulletin boards shall not excee
square feet in area and shall be located on
the premises of such institutions.
(b) Any sign advertising a commercial enter-
prise, including real estate developments
or subdivisions, permitted in a district zoned
residential by any zoning regulation shall
not excee square feet in area and
shall advertise only the name of the owner,
trade names, products sold and/or the busi-
ness or activity conducted on the premises
where such sign is located, provided:
(1) No more than two signs shall be allowed
for each business or commercial activity
conducted on the premises which shall
in all respects conform to the provisions
of this local law respecting establish-
ments in business districts.
(c) A sign or notice having an area of
square feet or less of a public utility, gaso-
line service station, public garage, and out-
door display area necessary for the direc-
tion, information, or safety of the public.
(d) Ors any gasoline service station, not more
than one pole sign erected for the purpose
of advertising the brand of gasoline sold at
such service station, provided such pole sign
have a maximum area of not more than
Fee t, and a maximum height of not
more tha f eet to the top of such
pole sign.
SIGNS BY ZONES
One purpose of comprehensive sign ordinances is to
mum that signs are compatible with their surroundings.
To do this, most ordinances regulate classes of signs ac-
cording to the zone in which they will be erected. For ex-
ample, billboards are almost universally prohibited in
residential districts. Thev also place restrictions on the
size, height, projection, lighting, and movement of each
sign according to the location of the sign.
Residential districts tend to be the most restrictive,
generally limiting signs to house numbers and occupant's
name, and real estate For Sale signs. If there are numer-
ous nonresidential uses in predominantly residential
zones, a special sign provision can be .nade. The nature
of most residential areas would require that nonresiden-
tial uses should be allowed a limited number of small
signs facing each street, displaying just the name of the
*As reprinted In ?mrd Um Controls Quarterly Itroiew, Vol. 2, 1968,
p 39.
business or institution and the purpose of the oper.00n,
Churches are usually regulated in this manner.
Sign regulations for commercial districts tend to be
graduated, allowing progressively larger numbers and
sizes of signs as the districts increase in density and size.
For example, a neighborhood shopping district will be
more restricted than the central business districts. Shop-
ping centers may be the least restrictive of all. Several
factors need to be considered when developing sign
standards for commercial districts. First, the location of
the intended viewer is important. Will people be reading
the signs primarily from the sidewalk or from a moving
car? Second, how many signs, and what size signs, can
be located in a single area and be clearly visible? Finally,
what number and configuration of signs is possible with-
out having a negative impact on the appearance of the
district? These three concerns should receive careful con-
sideration during the development of a sign ordinance
for commercial districts.
Industrial districts are usually the least restrictive,
allowing almost any type of sign. However, if the indus-
trial zone has experienced limited development, or has
been developed as a single unit (an industrial park), then
attempts are frequently made to develop a stricter sign
code consistent with surrounding development.
Some ordinances have tables that present the sign m-
quirements for each zoning district at a glance. This ap-
proach may be of interest to municipalities wanting to
upgrade their prescriptive sign ordinances. Like other
features of zoning ordinances, these regulations tend to
be cumulative. The signs allowed in residential districts
One purpose of comprehensive sign ordinance is to ensure that
signs are compatible with their surroundings.
are automatically allowed in commercial districts, and
so on. Some examples of the table format for sign ordi-
nances are shown in Tables 1 -3.
DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS
In keeping with the stated intent of ordinances to pro-
tect the health and safety of the citizenry, most sign ordi-
nances will specify construction and design standards to
prevent the construction of signs that are faulty and
hazardous. Many communities include a single sentence
instructing signs to meet the structural requirement set
forth in the appropriate chapters of their building codes.
Fairfax County, Virginia, and Falls Church, Virginia,
follow this procedure, Another common practice is to
refer to the Uniform Building Code,' Volume 5, which
provides a comprehensive set of construction standards
for signs. These specifications include wind loads, vibra-
tion resistence, seismic loads, acceptable supports, al-
lowable stresses, materials, and electrical wiring.
SIGN STANDARDS IN THE BUILDING CODE
The city of Orlando, Florida, requires that a building
permit be obtained from the Building Official before
any sign can be constructed in order to assure the sign's
compliance with the code. The ordinance reads like this:
158.148 -1 BUILDING PERMIT
(1) Building Permit Required
No person shall erect, alter, repair, or relocate
any sign without first obtaining a building per-
mit for such work from the Building Official of
the city of Orlando. No permit shall be Issued
until the Zoning Department determines that
such work is in accordance with the requ(re-
ments contained in this Article and the Building
Inspection Department determines that such
work will not violate the building or electrical
codes of the city of Orlando. Except as other-
wise provided, permits required by this Section
will be issued pursuant to the same terms and
according to the same fee schedule as all other
building permits.
(A) Application
The permit application shall be signed by
the applicant or his agent, and, when the
applicant is any person other than the
owner of the property, the application
shall also be signed by the owner of the
property or his agent and shall contain the
name and address of the sign owner and
sign erector.
The Battle Creek, Michigan, ordinance, like many
others, begins by refering to the Building Code of the
Building Officials and Code Administrators (BOCA) In-
ternational, Inc., and the City Electrical Code. Unlike
other communities, Battle Creek has created some addi-
tional specifications.
e Adds available in Appendix.
S3•65• COMPLIANCE VMH CODES
All signs hereafter erected shall comply with all
applicable provisions of the Code of the Building
Officials and Code Administrators (BOCA) Inter-
national, Inc., relating to structural design and to
the City Electrical Code for applicable components
and installation and to the auxiliary specification
set forth in this Article.
{8.66. AIIXILIARYSPECIRCATIONS
(1) Obstruction to Flits. No sign shall be erected
so as to obstruct any fin escape, required
exit, window, or door opening intended as a
means of egress.
(2) Obstruction to Ventilation. No sign shall
be erected which interferes; with any opening
required for ventilation.
(3) Clearance from Electrical Power Lines and
Communications Lines. Signs shall maintain
all clearances from electrical conductors in
accordance with the City Electrical Code and
from all communications equipment or fines
located within the city of Battle Creek.
(4) Ckarance from Surface and Underground
Facilities. Signs and their supporting struc-
tures shall maintain clearance and noninter-
ference with all surface and underground fa-
cilities and conduits for water, sewage, gas,
electricity, or communications equipment
or lines. Furthermore, placement shall not
interfere with natural or artificial drainage or
surface or underground water.
l5) Drainage. The roofs of canopies exceeding
twenty -five (15) square feet shall be drained
to prevent dripping or flowage onto public
sidewalk, or stres u and shall be connected to
an approved disposal source by adequate
conductors.
(6) Visible angle iron or other frames supporting
projecting signs, roof and canopy signs, as
well as chain supports are prohibited; except
structures of an artistic nature which may re-
ceived express approval of the Zoning Board
of Appeals. ITitle VII, 'Building Regula-
tions," Ch. 300, "Signs," of the City Code of
Ordinances, Article V, "Construction Speci-
fications."I
Commsmitie; with special geographic features may
want to crnsider placing additions! requirements on the
construction of signs. The city of Phoenix, Arizona, for
example, recognizes the need for considering wind speeds,
during the design and construction of signs,:
A. WIND PRESSURE
For the purpose of determining wind pressures, all
signs shall be classified as either open or solid. Signs
in which the projected area exposed to wind con-
10
Whenever interference is caused by an un-
filtered, improperly filtered, or otherwise
defective sign, or by any other electrical de-
vice or apparatus connected to the sign, the
building official shall order the sign discon-
nected until repairs are made.
SIGN ORDINANCE ADMINISTRATION
Administering a sign ordinance generally involves
several procedures. These procedures include owners'
permits, licensing of contractors, inspection provisions,
provision for revocation of permits, construction re-
quirements and fee schedule, certificate of insurance,
and maintenance specifications. Although these steps
may seem numerous, and therefore costly and cumber-
some to any municipality using them, each is necessary
to ensure a community freedom from hazardous signs
and the successful implementation of the sign code.
PERMITS
The National Electrical Sign Association (NESA)'
published a brochure covering sign regulation, with a
special emphasis on electric signs. Following is its sug-
gested permit procedure:
A permit should be applied for and received from
the city before erecting, placing, rebuilding, recon-
structing, or moving any sign.
Every application for preliminary plan approval
should be accompanied by a plan or plans drawn
to scale and including:
a. The dimensions of the sign and, where appli-
cable, the dimensions of the wall surface of
the building to which it is to be attached.
b. The dimensions of the sign's supporting
members.
c. The maximum and minimum height of the
sign.
d. The proposed location of the sign in relation
to the face of the building, in front of which
or above which it is to be erected.
e. The proposed location of the sign in relation
to the boundaries of the lot upon which it is
to be situated.
I. Where the sign is to be attached to an exist-
ing building, a current photograph of the face
of the building to which the sign is to be
attached.
The following changes should not require a sign
permit. These exceptions would not be construed as
relieving the owner of the sign from the responsi-
bility of its erection and maintenance, and its com-
pliance with the provisions of this ordinance or any
other law or ordinance regulating same.
a. The changing of the advertising copy or mes-
Address in Appendix.
sage of a painted, plastic face, or printed sign
only. Except for signs specifically designed for
the use of replaceabl^ copy, electric signs shall
not be includtd in this exception.
b. The electrical, repainting, or cleaning main-
tenance of a sign.
c. The repair of a sign.
Many ordinances follow the provisions as spelled out
in NESA guidelines, although most find it necessary to
elaborate on certain points. The city of Boulder, Colo-
rado, is such a community.
448 -301. PERMITS
Except as provided in 448 -401 of this code, it shall
be unlawful to display, erect, relocate, or alter any
sign without first filing with the building official
an application in writing and obtaining a sign
permit.
When a sign permit has been issued by the building
official, it shall be unlawful to change, modify, alter,
or otherwise deviate from the terms or conditions
of said permit without prior approval of the building
official. A written record of such approval shall be
entered upon the original permit application and
maintained in the files of the building official.
448- 301.1. APPLICATION FOR PERMIT
The application for a sign permit shall be made by
the owner or tenant of the property on which the
sign is to be located, or his authorized agent, or a
sign contractor licensed by the city of Boulder. Such
applications shall be made in writing on forms fur-
nished by the Department of Zoning and Building
inspection and shall be signed by the applicant.
The budding official shall, within five working days
of the date of the application, either approve or
deny the application or refer the application back to
the applicant in any instance where insufficient in-
formation has been furnished.
440 -303. PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND
OTHER DATA
The application for a sign permit shall be accom-
panied by following plans and other information:
(a) The name, address, and telephone number of
the owner or persons entitled to possession
of the sign and of the sign contractor or
erector.
(b) The location by street address of the proposed
sign structure.
(c) Complete information as required on appli-
cation forms provided by the Department of
Zoning and Building Inspection, including a
site plan and elevation drawings of the pro-
posed sign, caption of the proposed sign, and
such other data as are pertinent to the
application.
16
(d) Plans indicating the scope and structural de-
tail of the work to be done, including details
of all connections, guy lines, supports and
footings, and materials to be used.
(e) Application for, and required information
for such application, an electrical permit for
for all electric signs if the person building the
sign is to make the electrical connection.
(f) A statement of valuation
Chapter 3. Enforcement
Like any ordinance, sign ordinances are only effective
if they are enforced. Whether the enforcement process is
simple or complex, inexpensive or costly, will depend
on the scope of the ordinance, the numbers of signs in-
volved, and the enforcement procedure provided in the
ordinance. Without a commitment to ordinance enforce-
ment, a new ordinance will be not only ineffective but
inequitable. Businesses operating under the new ordi-
nance will probably be governed by stricter regulations
than sign owners operating under previous or nonexist-
ent regulations, giving these businesses an unfair
advantage.
This section will discuss various methods of ordinance
enforcement, as well as the probable cost to the
community.
MAINTENANCE AND REMOVAL
An essential aspect of any sign ordinance is the re-
quirement that signs be maintained in a safe and attrac-
tive manner. Without this provision, hazardous or un-
sightly signs may remain indefinitely, or until their per-
mits expire. By inserting a maintenance provision into
the ordinance, the city can remove the offending sign after
a specified number of days or at the discretion of an au-
thorized official. This type of provision can also be used
to remove on- premises signs that no longer correlate with
the business they advertise.
The Boulder, Colorado, ordinance briefly states that
all signs shall be kept in good repair and makes enforce-
ment the responsibility of the building official:
Every sign, including those specifically exempt from
this code in respect to permits and permit fees, shall
be maintained in good structural condition at all
times. All signs shall be kept neatly painted, includ-
ing all metal parts and supports thereof that arc not
galvanized or of rust - resistant material. The build-
in$ official or his authorized representative shall
inspect and shall have the authority to order the
painting, repair, alteration, or removal of a sign
which shall constitute a hazard to safety, health, or
public welfare by reason of inadequate maintenance,
dilapidation, or obsolescence.
Falls Church, Virginia, has similar maintenance re-
quirements, but requires in addition that every two
years, every sign be painted or treated unless the sign is
"aluminium, stainless steel, galvanized, plastic, or per-
manently treated to retard weathering by the elements."
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, has developed a more
elaborate set of requirements for maintenance, repair,
and removal. The ordinance stipulates that abandoned
signs will be removed within three months and that sign
removal will be handled by the administrator following
a procedure identified in the ordinance. This lengthy
provision may be most appropriate in communities with
a substantial sign problem:
{25 -7.9.1
Every sign, including but not limited to those signs
for which permits or for which no permits or per-
mit fees are required, shall be maintained in a safe,
presentable, and good structural material condition
at all times, including the replacement of defective
parts, painting, repainting, cleaning, and other acts
required for the maintenance of said sign. The
owner of any property on which a sign is located
and those responsible for maintenance of the sign
shall be equally responsible for the conditions of the
area in the vicinity of the sign and shall be required
to keep this area clean, sanitary, and free from.
noxious or offensive substances, rubbish, and flam-
mable waste materials. The administrator shall
require compliance with all standards of this article.
19
If the sign is rot made to comply with adequate
safer+ standards, the administrator shall require its
remora: in accordance with this section.
§25- 7.9.2. Abandoned Signs
E+cepr as oiherwise provided in this article, any
Sign that is located on property which becomes va-
cant and is unoccupied for a period of three months
or more or any sign •.which pertains to a time,
ever: or purpose which no longer applies, shall be
,teemed to have beer. abandoned Pe- r^:anent signs
applicable to a b a:, -ess temp .a.ilc. speaded be-
cacse of a charge e( e.. nersh p o - acement of
T . a .
sock b -s -ess shz �t be dr ca a! - .and d or - --
:essthe p: ape e•tar, s vacar, R :r z r" id of s
months or mere A- abandoned sign .s proh:b,o iJ
and shall be removed by the "ner m the sign or
owner of the premises.
X25- 7.9.3. Dangerous or Defective Signs
No parson shall maintain or perm i to be maintained
on any ptocrni5es owned or cor. o led by h,m ary
sign which is in a dangerous or uefe t- •e cordmor.
Atry such sign shall be rem ed or repaired b,
the uw ner of the dgr or then reraf {rep
J. Removal of Signs by the Administrator
The administrator +hall cause to. be re;roved any
sign tfat endangers the public Safety such as an
abardorej dangerous, orma e :, e ;ec•n<aily,
or stn,c uraily derective . sign, cr a sign fog wr.ch no
sot'ac tr "heets pa r.., anger , s wr ad..,; i ,a "..4 'rs
il;,rr:^at;,r art tyy :cal reenci:msrue, t esu dcnm.reie}
permit has Been issued. The adm:n:strator shall
prepare a rotice wAh' ch shall desa:be the s:gr and
Specify the c :o :at:en ;r o!red and ..etch s ^all state
that. if the sign is not removed cr :he vio aeon is
not co..we'_ xr. : ^.tn 10 days, the s:gr = ^a:! be re.
moved in accordance with the provismns of this
section.
Ail notices mailed by the administrator shall be sent
by ceirt ;feed mail Any time periods provided in this
sec::on shat: be deemed to commence on the date
of the rece p o certified ma;i.
For a;, e. s'gr :he notice slid be a .ed to the
. ^.e' C7 e :uer on w* - ;c^ t S '.s located
as shcn. _ or the !as. equalized assessment ro;i. If
known. cr .:r reassnable case shcsld be kno•.wn-
!he neater shall be trailed to or delivered in the
ccnr. <, -e sign. a^d the ocrtpant of :hr grope : : ; :.
n p.rs r 't a ng an interest in !re sign or tire
proper - ,peal the drier- a .cn of the ad-
m,mv der:r.g rern a. or c :once b. f:b
e r;.::ce of appeal wim he.Okia;^cma
CF a S a tAt ,rent Within 3Cda.s after the
.dace c , ^g
1-It notice or 30 da _ after receipt
of :he tic ce ,f t ^e route »•as not ma.leo
site: arcrna C.ty (Oklahoma Ord„ '
C
s,-
rr
20
v 9¢
.
•Af In
r
1 >
s