8-26-13-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION JULY 15, 2013 2 Councilmember Holmes asked why Verizon wanted to locate a building on City Hall property. Joe Egge, Faulk & Foster, provided the Council with additional information regarding request. He explained that Verizon was dropping calls in this area and that a cell tower on the City Hall property would assist in filling a dead zone along Highway 96. He proposed renting the space from the City for $1,200 per month. He commented that a second cell phone carrier could be added on the tower for additional revenue if the Council desired. Councilmember Holden did not support the proposal given the space that would be taken up at City Hall, and that the majority of Arden Hills already had adequate service from Verizon. Councilmember Holmes commented that she was quite shocked to see the proposed building right next to the City Hall building. She suggested an alternative site be selected. Mr. Egge stated that the County land was reviewed but a suitable location was not found. He stated that the City Hall property was the only suitable location found along the Highway 96 corridor. Councilmember Werner was not in favor of the proposed location as it would limit the future expansion of City Hall. Councilmember McClung stated that given the potential need for expansion of City Hall in the future, he too did not support the Verizon proposal. Mayor Grant commented that the proposed location of the tower and building were a concern considering City Hall may need to be expanded in the future. He did not feel that the City Hall site was the correct piece of property for Verizon. He indicated that based on the B.Dynamic Display Sign Ordinance Community Development Intern Bachler stated that the Shell gas station on County Road E has submitted a sign permit application to reface an existing freestanding sign on their property to include an LED price sign. A similar price sign was approved administratively for the Holiday gas station on Highway 96 in November 2010. Based on ode, this type of sign qualifies as a dynamic display sign, which is not permitted in the City. Community Development Intern Bachler explained that dynamic display refers to digital advertising signs whose content is updated electronically. These signs commonly use LED or plasma displays. He reported that municipalities have responded to the increased use of these types of signs by coming up with regulations and exemptions to limit their use and design. The ode makes no exceptions for the use of dynamic display signs. Community Development Intern Bachler requested that the Council discuss the use of dynamic display signs in the City and direct staff if a sign code update is needed.