04/04/2006 - Window Sign Task ForceMEETING NOTES
WINDOW SIGAGE TASK FORCE MEETING
APRIL 4, 2006
Task Force members in attendance: Dave Perrier, Perrier Wines & Spirits; Jack
Johnson, Cartridge World; Ruthe Batulis, NDC Chambers of Commerce; Buzz
Anderson, Minnesota Retailers Association; .John Curlee, State Farm Insurance,
Advisory Planning Commission members Ted Gladhill and Gary Hansen; and City
Councilmembers Cyndee Fields and Mike Maguire.
Present in the audience: Wes Hallberg, Yocum Oil .Comp;any representative and
owner/operator of the Holiday Stationstore at Cliff and Thomas Center Drive, and a
representative of the Diffley/Lexington Great Clips.
City staff in attendance: Community Development Director Jon Hohenstein..and City
Planner Mike Ridley.
Community Development Director Jon Hohenstein opened the meeting by providing
background information on the Sign Ordinance and the reason for the meeting today.
Cyndee Fields stated that she is aware the City needs to listen and is interested in
finding a balance between. business needs and the City's needs.
Mike Maguire spoke about the need to find a, balance between community needs and
the business needs as wel9.
Buzz Anderson asked where the Sign Ordinance came from and why. He stated that
he has lived in Eagan for over 15 years and has never heard any complaints about
signs.
Councilmember Fields responded that she has had concerns shared with her that are
not, typically, relative to a specific development item.
Councilmember Maguire echoed the same and stated he has has also received
complaints (mostly while attending civic events such as the 4th of July celebration) that
are not in writing but in passing where someone will mention a concern about too much
1
signage. That, in addition, he stated to the City Council's review regarding upgrading
material finishes in the commercial/retail areas brought the window signage issue to
light while the Council was reviewing photos of same businesses, but located in
different cities.
Jon Hohenstein commented on the inception of the City Council's direction to the
Planning Commission to review window signage and the Council's desire to obtain a
level playing field.
Dave Perrier remarked that there was not a lot of input from the :audience when the
Planning Commission held its Public Hearing on this ordinance amendment. .He went'
on to say that he would like to know exactly what it is the City wants and, stressed the
importance of having the City understand what the business needs are.
Mike Maguire spoke about an outcome fie. hopes balances. everyone's needs. He
specifically spoke to the rationale behind :the 4'-6` clear zone and how that related to the
best management practice in the public safety community.
Jon Hohenstein commented that it is not unusual for people unfamiliar with City
meetings and public_ hearings to understand when it is appropriate to speak. He also
said that that was the purpose for the communication efforts the City made with press
releases,, weekly articles in both the local paper and the St. Paul Pioneer Press,
information in the Eagan Business Newsletter, and the inclusion of Chamber President
Ruthe Batulis and',her ability to mass email multiple businesses.
Mr. Hohenstein explained that all of the communications lead up to a February meeting
of the Planning Commission where interested parties were invited to testify regarding
the proposed Ordinance Amendment. He further stated that based on testimony
received in February, modifications were made to the Draft Ordinance Amendment for
which the Planning Commission held a Public Hearing in April. Additional testimony
was received at that meeting and the item was carried over to the May Planning
2
Commission meeting to allow further modifications based on business community
concerns.
John Curlee stated that the group was spinning its wheels trying to figure out the
communications breakdown and proposed to move forward. He would like to start with
just some simple points for the group to consider: 1) Keep it simple. 2) The clear zone
which is at eye level a prime location for business I.D. and infOirrhation. 3) Window
space generally is a prime location for business promotion. 4) If there is going to be a
permit and/or fee, would existing businesses with existing signs be grandfathered? 5)
What is the criteria and interpretation relative to enforcement? 6) . Would corporate
branding be allowed? 7) The importance of consistency with enforcement.
Buzz Anderson said that he doesn't understand the 4'-6' clear zone and wondered if it
was necessary. He questioned that if no .one can see into.: a ,bank, and other businesses
choose to have curtains/blinds or don't have window space at all, how does that line up
with the public safety concern of seeing in and. out of a, -building? Jon Hohenstein
commented that it was simply a best management practice provided by public safety
and wasn't a code requirement,. but as part of the window signage amendment effort, it
was included.
Mike Maguire agreed with Hohenstein and commented that a 4'-6' clear zone was not a
bottom=line issue to him.
Dave Perrier commented that some businesses, particularly national, have unique or
recognizable buildFngs.or architecture that result in the building essentially being a logo.
He asked if he could simply tell the group what his business needs?
Mike Maguire stated he was open to that suggestion.
3
Ted Gladhill commented that the Planning Commission and Council typically deal with
infill issues where either retail wasn't originally intended or its coming into a space now
that is in close proximity to existing neighborhoods.
Wes Hallberg, commented that small business can't compete with large businesses or
national chains from the standpoint of marketing budgets.
Jack Johnson commented that the 4'-6' clear zone was a.n impediment on his business
operation and that signage he installed on a permanent wall approximately 3' back from
the side windows illustrates the concern of interpretation and enforcement.
Dave Perrier said that given the fact that vehicles can park in front of his tenant space,
he needs visibility over those parked cars out front and -went on to state that he needs
window signage to get people into the .store by alerting them of specials currently being
offered. He went on to say that the City" should: be concerned only with what people can
see from the public right-of-way.
John Curlee commented that .corporate branding is important, that window signage is
important for promotions;, and that he chose., a retail center intentionally because of
traffic generated and, as. such, pays a higher rent and higher taxes. He says
businesses would like to maximize their retail space and would like the ability to put
signage:in a window announcing promotions, for example.
Buzz Anderson . commented that he represents businesses of all sizes, but small
business is more affected by City regulations regarding advertising and promotion. His
organization sees more and more cities infringing on more businesses and they don't
belong there.
Cyndee Fields commented that the bill the Retailers Association had before the
Legislature isn't appropriate because it takes local control away from cities and tries a
"one size fits all" statewide.
rd
Jon Hohenstein commented on future meetings.
Buzz Anderson asked if there is a bottom line.
Mike Maguire stated that he would like to limit the number of meetings, cover more
ground at each meeting, and said there is not a bottom line.
Cyndee Fields asked if permits are a big issue.
John Curlee stated that permits are a big deal.
Mike Maguire suggested that advertising is okay, yet interpretation (i.e. products back
from windows) needs to be looked at..
There was a brief discussion about the 20% wall coverage. maximum.
Buzz Anderson asked if the 20%. was negotiable.
Mike Maguire `stated that it was not, that portion of the Code has existed for many years
and it is not part of the charge of the City Council to the Task Force.
Jon Hohenstein stated that it might be helpful for the group to understand exactly what
part of the new.ordinance is. most troubling for the business owner in attendance.
John Curlee suggested that Ruthe Batulis email some businesses on the issues and
recommended the following points for future discussion: 1) criteria and interpretation;
2) percentage, 3) permit issue, 4) grandfathering and how it will be enforced.
Ted Gladhill stated there should be a limit that creates fairness in competition.
5
Mike Maguire summarized three things he would like from the standpoint of information
for the next meeting: 1) He requested Task Force members representing the business
community provide pictures/examples of signs that would need to be altered to comply
with the ordinance as it exists today. 2) What are the specific ordinance language
changes the businesses would like to see? 3) Is there a balance that can be struck?
Discussion occurred relative to gathering information.
The next Task Force meeting was scheduled for Tuesday, April 18., at 4:00 p.m. in the
Eagan Room.
As the meeting concluded, Jon Hohenstein reiterated that it would be helpful for the
business owners in attendance to provide staff information (photos if necessary,
explaining how the current ordinance., negatively affects their existing signage) by the
middle of next week, preferably on or before April 12.
CD/Jon Hohenstein/Signage/Meeting Notes/Meeting of 4-4-06
n
