05-16-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Approved 5 Ayes,2 Nays. MOTION APPROVED. Public Hearings: ZA2006-006 Zoning Code Amendment Related to Directional Signage for Institutional Uses The Commission held a public hearing on April 18, 2006 to discuss a Zoning Code amendment related to directional signage for institutional uses. This amendment was drafted in response to a letter received from Christ the King Lutheran Church and direction by the City Council. In response to the concerns raised at the last meeting, staff contacted a MnDOT representative responsible for signing and markings within the Metro District Traffic Office and also met with the Director of Public Works. Staff learned that the Minnesota Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MN MUTCD) was adopted to ensure that all municipalities use signage standards. While MnDOT recognizes that municipalities have the authority to place whatever signage they deem necessary within their right-of-ways, everyone has to conform to state law. MnDOT doesn't permit directional signs for institutional uses within the metro area, nor does Ramsey County permit these signs (although not enforcing these rules if these signs appear). The intention of the proposed ordinance was to rely on the Director of Public Works to ensure the design and placement of all signs meet uniform standards as these signs would typically appear with in the right of way. The City Code/Zoning Code currently does not allow this type of signage. Based on the information researched and the concerns of the Director of Public Works, staff finds that the current ordinance prohibiting directional signage within City rights-of-way should not be changed. Staff has contacted the church and alerted them about our recommendation. If the church withdraws their proposal, no formal action is needed. In the event the church wants to move forward, staff would recommend that the Planning Commission deny the request. Baker stated that he is concerned that if an institution puts up a sign illegally there is no repercussions. Gundlach replied that staff recognizes that concern and was the reason that this ordinance was first proposed. She added that any signs that are put in City right of way are removed. Additionally, with regard to the existing church directional signs, the Director of Public Works has suggested that if the City Council and Commission wish, a letter could be sent to the County requesting that the illegally placed signs on county roads be removed. Baker replied that he would like to have a standardization of signs, so these issues can be addressed properly. Fernelius stated that in the MnDOT manual various informational signs are address, churches are not. He added that staff was looking for a standard to help the City avoid visual clutter. If there is a strong desire for a sign standard then staff will readdress this issue, however the experts that the City looked to for help have stated that this may be a problematic issue. C.',Documents and Settings igocpcALocal'settings Temporary Intel nct Filcs`,OI.K28 0--I6-2006 MINUTI.S(2).doc Page 4 of 13