09-10-07-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 10, 2007 13 CounciImember Holmes listed the additions on the plan that were required due to weight, depth, and lighting. She asked for clarification that the additional items were required to support the new sign. Mr. McCarver replied the plans were correct. City Attorney Filla asked for clarification from Mr. Liszt that the light diodes are in fact the sign and changes to messages are done by regulating the colors of the diodes. Mr. Liszt replied that was correct. MOTION: Councilmember McClung moved and Councilmember Holmes seconded a motion to Affirm the Planning Commission's August I, 2007, Denial of Clear Channel's May 21, 2007, After-the-Fact Sign Permit Application for the Electronic Billboard Located in the Northeast Corner of the 1-35W and 1-694 Intersection based upon the findings that the amperage increased from approximately 100 to 400 amps, the lighting expanded from four external lights to thousands of LEDs, the width of the sign increased from approximately two inches to eight to ten inches, and the weight of the sign has increased from 1,000 pounds to 9,000 pounds, there have been a number of external supports added as shown in the application to support the additional weight, and that the LEDs in the sign are integral part to the sign and not an external lighting source as defmed by the Sign Code and therefore, based upon these findings, Council concludes this is an expansion and not an improvement. CounciImember Holmes made an amendment stating that based upon the signage amps, expansion of the number of external lights which have gone from four to no external light, the lights are internal, width increased, structural supports were added, and therefore the sign is an expansion of a non-conforming use rather than an improvement. McClung is acceptable to the addition to the motion. Councilmember Holmes summarized that this is an expansion due to expansion oflighting from 100 to 400 LED, weight of sign is now 9,000 pounds, additional structural support, the depth of sign increased to eight to ten inches. City Attorney Filla stated Council must state why an expansion. It is his understanding that relative to internallexternallighting issue that the sign itself is now the lighting. The thousands of diodes suggest that all the lighting is internal and the sign is the lighting. CounciImember Holmes stated the issue of the City requiring external lighting is not preempted by the Minnesota Outdoor Lighting Control Act. She quoted the act and stated the City's requirement that the lighting be external is not governed by State Statute. CounciImember Holden asked City Attorney Filla if, when Council looks to approve or deny this, it is basing its decision on the City's ordinances and zoning codes. City Attorney Filla replied yes and in fact the state regulations on expansion of non conforming uses are similar. He stated there is a difference of opinion whether this is an expansion rather than an improvement.