CC_Minutes_2013_0211 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, February 11, 2013 Page 23 Discussion included current code lack of recognition of some repair service busi- nesses and the need to address them. Councilmember Laliberte expressed her appreciation to staff for this helpful in- formation; with staff advising that the City Council could remain updated through following the Planning Commission's Public Hearing processes. Page 2, line 58 Councilmember Etten noted his discussions with businesses (e.g. Rice Street cor- ridor) who feel they are unable to advertise without being penalized, when busi- nesses across the street may do so. Councilmember Etten noted that their percep- tion is that this is unreasonable, and suggested revising sign regulations for tem- porary signs, such as buying an annual license packet that would allow a certain number of days allowed, and their notification by e-mail to the City Inspector of those dates for check-off to ensure their compliance, while not being onerous for small businesses. As the "Sign Czar," Mr. Paschke advised that each municipality had different zoning and sign requirements; and historically, Roseville has stated their prefer- ence to be a leader rather than a follower of its neighboring communities, and therefore, has had a tendency to have minimal signs allowed and a more restric- tive code. However, in the updated zoning code, Mr. Paschke noted that the pro- cess now allows for more flexibility for businesses and various options available to them. Mr. Paschke advised that he continually fielded concerns about limited times for signs, type or style of signs, some conducive to reuse while others are not. Also in his role as "Sign Inspector," Mr. Paschke advised that he also was charged with monitoring and enforcement of signs, with little time to do so. Mr. Paschke opined that the sign codes now in place are moving in the right direction to provide people with an understanding of what is or is not allowed, and had been based on listening to those concerns previously expressed; and now opening up more opportunities to them. At the request of Councilmember Etten regarding how to communicate those re- visions to businesses, Mr. Paschke advised that those vendors creating signs for businesses are fully aware of current code, and needed to relay that information to their clients. In his continuous discussions with businesses about signage, Mr. Paschke noted he pursues that educational outreach; and suggested another option may be to provide a letter to each business. Councilmember Etten spoke in support of that more proactive communication, since they probably didn't search city codes consistently; and with the extra flexi- bility provided with revised codes, this needed to be communicated to business owners. Councilmember Etten advised that he had also addressed the HRA about how to communicate with businesses long-term and allow them to be part of the process and allow them to pursue their opportunities.