Loading...
PC Minutes 02-04-2014City of Van Buren, Arkansas Annex 111 North 12th Street • Van Buren, Arkansas 72956 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 4, 2014 The Van Buren Planning Commission held its monthly meeting Tuesday, February 4, 2014 at 5:30 P.M. in the City Council Room of the Municipal Complex. The following items were on the agenda: 1. Approval of minutes from the last meeting 2. Discuss digital billboard ordinance 3. Any other business that becomes the commission. Members Present – Chairman Andy Dibble, Jay White, John Symonds, Mark Evans, Phil Bagby, and Scott Morgan Members Absent – Sue Moore, Jason Myers and Tiffany Webster Others Present – David Martin, Joseph Hurst, Lisa Franklin and City Attorney Candice Settle. Planning Commission Chairman Andy Dibble called the meeting to order at 5:30 P.M. The first action by the commission was to approve the minutes from the previous meeting. A motion was made by Scott Morgan and seconded by Mark Evans to approve the minutes. The motion was approved unanimously. The next item on the agenda was to discuss the digital billboard ordinance. Chairman Andy Dibble announced that the first thing on the agenda is the discussion for the billboard ordinance, specifically relating to the digital billboard and then David Martin has something that he wants to bring up for discussion more relative to signs in general. Planning Director Hurst introduced the new Planning Assistant, Lisa Franklin, and gave an overview of what has taken place with the sign/billboard ordinance. He states the Working Group met and discussed recommendations from the representative from Clear Channel. He states that David Martin and City Attorney Candice Settle have concerns that they want to address so the public meeting on this will be next month to allow ample time to discuss all concerns and to make necessary changes. Mr. Hurst introduced Ryan Zaloudik with Clear Channel Outdoor. Mr. Zaloudik spoke about the industry standard on digital billboards and the suggestions for the proposed changes to the sign ordinance specifically with respect to digital billboards based on the industry standard. He states that they have worked with cities across the U.S. to put in place ordinances. He says that digital billboards are the signage of the future and that they want to help provide thoughtful framework for the ordinance and be able to have regulations that are in place that are responsible and provide accountability. He says the sign companies want to be protected and they want us to be protected as well. He says we currently don’t have anything allowing digital or not allowing digital signs. He discussed regulations for size, lighting and specifically brightness and flashing lights. He also discussed message display time and digital billboard spacing. Andy Dibble asked, where this information for the changes to the ordinance, was generated from? He asks, if it is pieced together from other ordinances? Mr. Zaloudik with Clear Channel responds, that this is the industry standard and comes from the way other city ordinances are written. He explains some of the items that are included in the proposed changes and additions. Scott Morgan asks if there are normally any restrictions for any certain kind of billboards limited to any certain areas of town for example, would there be any cities that may allow only traditional billboards in town verses they restrict the digital billboard to an interstate? Mr. Zaloudik says that the basic ordinance addresses that to some degree with size limitations and state regulations. Mr. Zaloudik says he is not aware of any restrictions other than size limitations, off the top of his head. John Symonds asks about the distance being defined properly in section 7.11. He asks, if this is vertical or horizontal? Mr. Zaloudik states that he believes it is eye level. Mr. Symonds says we have to define it. Phil Bagby suggests if it said in “c” from the front of the sign from 6’ above ground level, would this take care of defining it properly? Mr. Zaloudik states, he believes you do the measurement from the center of the sign face. Phillip Bagby says we should just be able to insert in “c” from the front of the sign at 6 feet above ground level. Mr. Zaloudik states the industry standard is 5’. Mr. Bagby agrees 5 feet above ground level if that is that industry standard. Scott Morgan voices concern with question regarding offensive language being used on signs and if there is any way to keep that from happening? David Martin addresses section 3.0 of the code and states that he would like to add something that addresses sign with personal messages such as signs advertising school sports etc. The wording of what these signs would be referred to is discussed and City Attorney Candace Settle states they should be referred to as non-profit organization. Discussion of the number of signs allowed per lot and the size of signs and where they may be placed are discussed. Andy Dibble says we should limit a number. Phil Bagby recommends one sign per lot verses 2 or 3 or more. He feels it would be easiest to defend. If you allow more than one sign then why not another, and another? Mr. Bagby states, if the goal is to avoid a for profit sign being allowed then the term non-profit organization would properly address these type of signs. David Martin says they have also had complaints with vehicles and trailers being used as signs and parked for extended periods of time. A vehicle being parked in the business parking lot verses on a public roadway or lot and wrapped vehicles were all discussed and agreed that Signs attached or painted on vehicles are permitted if they are used as a vehicle in the normal day to day operation of the business. Candice Settle feels we have some contradictory language in regards to the rotating and flashing lights relating to the billboard in Sec 5 and Sec 7.11 of the Billboard Ordinance and suggests some clarification on this. In regards to this, there is suggestion of striking Section 5 and then the question of whether Section 7.11 would cover the protection they want and need. Candice Settle also states that under section 9, Non-Conforming signs, that she feels we may be saying, that if it’s a digital billboard we don’t care what it is structurally. Phil Bagby suggests striking Section 5 and make changes to 7.11 that would strike the words, subject to the provisions of Section 7.11.7 above and add on the end, which is otherwise in compliance with this ordinance. Ms. Settle agrees on the clarification. The changes agreed upon during the discussions in this meeting are as follows: CITY OF VAN BUREN PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO ORDINANCE NO. 11-2001 I. Sec 2.0. Definitions and Interpretations is hereby amended to add the following definition after “Construction Sign”: “Digital Billboard” An off-site sign utilizing digital message technology, capable of changing the static message or copy on the sign electronically. A digital billboard may be internally or externally illuminated. Digital billboards shall contain static messages only, and shall not have animation, movement, or the appearance of optical illusion of movement, of any part of the sign structure. Each static message shall not include flashing or the varying of light intensity. II. Section 5.0. Prohibited Signs is hereby amended to add the following language after the words “text messages” at the end of Paragraph 1 thereof: “or Digital Billboards.” Sec 7.11 Billboards is hereby amended to add the following language at the end of Paragraph 7 thereof: “Digital Billboards are permitted hereunder provided subject to the following requirements: a. Operational Limitations. Such displays shall contain static messages only, and shall not have movement, or the appearance or optical illusion of movement during the static display period, of any part of the sign structure, design, or pictorial segment of the sign, including the movement or appearance of movement. Each static message shall not include flashing lighting or the varying of light intensity. b. Minimum display time. Each message on the sign must be displayed for a minimum of (8) eight seconds. c. Digital billboards shall not operate at brightness levels of more than 0.3 foot candles above ambient light, as measured using a foot candle meter at a pre-set distance from the center of the sign at five feet above ground level. d. Pre-set distances to measure the foot candles impact vary with the expected viewing distances of each size sign. Measurement distance criteria: Nominal Distance to Face Size be measured from: 12’ x 25’ 150' 10'6” x 36’ 200' 14’ x 48’ 250' e. Each display must have a light sensing device that will adjust the brightness as ambient light conditions change. f. Digital billboard spacing shall reflect the standards approved by the State of Arkansas. III. Sec. 9.0 Nonconforming Signs is hereby amended to add the following language at the end of the second paragraph thereof after the words “structure of the sign”: “, except in the event a nonconforming sign is replaced by a Digital Billboard. A nonconforming sign may be replaced by a Digital Billboard subject to the provisions of Section 7.11.7 above.” Which is otherwise in compliance with this Ordinance. Andy Dibble asks if everyone’s concerns are covered on the sign ordinance and confirms that Joe Hurst will make the changes and e-mail them out for review. Motion was made by Scott Morgan and seconded by John Symonds to recommend adjournment. The motion was approved unanimously. With no more business, this meeting was adjourned. ___________________________ _________________________ Andy Dibble, Chairman Joseph Hurst, Planning Director PROGRESS IS OUR PROJECT