Laserfiche WebLink
-Approved <br />dates the nonconforming section to comply with state law that drastically changed several years ago. The <br />table change allows a nonconforming sign to be replaced, which the code did previously not allow. <br />On March 27, 2007 the City Council adopted a moratorium impacting the "erection, relocation, repair, or <br />modification of static or changing electronic, digital video, display signs, billboards or freeway signs and <br />flashing, motion, animated, changeable copy and illuminated signs". This moratorium was an attempt to <br />respond to the billboard industry's recent implementation of new LED billboards that could change messages <br />and have video capabilities. At the time many communities were enacting such moratoriums at the <br />recommendation of the League of Minnesota Cities as the impacts of these signs were somewhat unknown. <br />Following adoption of the moratorium in March, the League of MN Cities announced that a study was being <br />conducted for the City of Minnetonka, by SRF Consulting, to determine what impacts may result from these <br />signs. The SRF study was reviewed by City staff and the proposed changes are in direct response to the study. <br />City staff can provide a copy of this study for those who wish to review it in its entirety. The SRF study found <br />no conclusive link to traffic accidents and dynamic signs. However, the study did demonstrate that under <br />certain circumstances there is an increased chance for traffic hazards due to dynamic signs. <br />Zisla stated that he had discussed this with Gundlach through email. He asked if the definition of reader board <br />was taken away because they could be turned into a dynamic sign and thus falls under the scope of this <br />ordinance. Gundlach replied that was correct. Ile inquired if any more applications for a reader board would <br />under go a review process and would any existing signs need to undergo a special use permit review. Gundlach <br />replied that the only properties to under go a special use permit review to allow a dynamic sign would be non- <br />sidential uses in a residential district, like churches or day cares since they are specially permitted in the <br />sidential district. She added that any other commercial or industrial property would not need to come before <br />the Commission for a special use permit, they would need to meet the regulations of the ordinance only. Zisla <br />replied that as the technology advances and becomes less costly, that potentially these signs could be anywhere, <br />and could argue that the restrictions need to be stronger. Baker stated that a sign in front of a building needs <br />less luminance, since the sign would be at eye level. <br />Zisla asked how high the luminance is for the dynamic board on Hwy 694 in Arden Hills. Gundlach replied <br />that she does not know what the luminance setting is for the LED boards and offered to find out what <br />information she can about the brightness level for the Commission. Zisla asked if the luminance standard in our <br />ordinance is what was agreed to in the law suit or if it is lower. Gundlach replied that she does not know what <br />the negotiated luminance is for that litigation, or if luminance was specifically addressed. Zisla replied that the <br />City ordinance should match the level or be lower than the negotiated level. Gundlach stated that the signs also <br />must meet the safety regulations as an additional layer of security. <br />Schiferl asked where the 5,000 — 7,000 level came from. Gundlach replied that the levels came from the SRI, <br />study, which stated that these are appropriate levels in terms of driver distraction regarding brightness. <br />Schiferl stated that there are some colors that are brighter than others, and wondered if that could be regulated. <br />Gundlach replied that this is an enforcement issue, since staff would require the information from the sign <br />manufacturer, the hope is compliance is confirmed before the sign is even installed. If staff does not have that <br />information, a permit could not be issued on the proposed code change. She added that bulb color is built into <br />4Ie luminance, which is why, luminance was chosen over foot-candles. <br />Page I 1 of 12 <br />