MINUTES. Minutes from the November 10, 2009 meeting were approved by a consensus vote.

Transcription

1 CITY OF ST. PETERSBURG PLANNING & VISIONING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING Council Chambers December 8, 2009 City Hall Tuesday, 4:00 p.m. MINUTES Present: Jeff Rogo, Chair Martha L. Kehm William E. Klein Ed Montanari Robert Lee Nolan, Vice Chair Thomas Whiteman, Jr. Ben Fisher, Alternate Brian C. Melton, Alternate Commissioners Absent: Doug Robison 1 1 excused Staff Present: Julie Weston, Director, Development Services Rob Gerdes, Planner, Development Services Kim Proano, Legal Dept. Vicky Davidson, Administrative Assistant, Development Services The public hearing was called to order at 4:00 p.m., a quorum was present. MINUTES Minutes from the November 10, 2009 meeting were approved by a consensus vote. PUBLIC HEARING Agenda Item City File LDR Contact Person: Julie Weston Request: Public hearing to gather input on proposed amendments to City Code Chapter 16, Land Development Regulations, regarding digital billboards. Staff Presentation Julie Weston first gave the context and process of this item and then proceeded with a presentation based on the staff report. Commissioner Nolan asked about the total number of billboards in the City. Ms. Weston replied that this item

2 pertains to the 144 billboards owned by Clear Channel Communication because they are the entity that the City has been in negotiation with. Although this is not the total number of billboards in the City, Clear Channel by a large margin is the largest advertiser in the City of St. Petersburg. Commissioner Kehm stated that there is nothing in the proposed ordinance stating existing billboards will be removed from the roadways. Ms. Weston agreed and stated that revisions are being made in conjunction with the City Attorney s Office and this is one of the revisions that will be included. Commissioner Kehm commented about several other items (i.e. message change time, visibility to drivers on both sides of road, 2,500-foot distance separation from boards facing in the same direction) to which Ms. Weston stated all will be addressed in the revisions. Commissioner Kehm asked about the possibility of adding a requirement of annual operating permits. Ms. Weston stated that annual operating permits are not typical and has not been discussed to date. Commissioner Kehm asked if the City is required to take signs down if there were any major revisions of a roadway (e.g. overpass or widening). Ms. Weston replied that in some cases relocation of a billboard is part of the infrastructure improvement project where the City cooperates with the outdoor advertiser with the relocation. Commissioner Kehm asked about a provision restricting billboards in areas where there are other traffic signs. Julie replied that this has not been talked about in particular but is certainly a possibility if there is a public safety reason. Commissioner Montanari asked if 1992 was the last time the City Code was updated. Julie replied, yes, other than the adoption of the existing code with the Land Development Regulations (LDRs) two years ago, which was not a substantial revision. Commissioner Melton asked for clarification of what the number of billboards means. Ms. Weston replied that the faces are counted (e.g. one double-faced billboard is counted as 2) Commissioner Melton asked about the 14 x 48 size. Ms. Weston stated that this is the largest size allowed by the state and most of the billboards along the interstate are this size. Commissioner Melton asked whose choice was the number 100 removed for 10 digital signs added. Ms. Weston stated that it was both the City s and Clear Channel s choice. Public Hearing Cathy Wilson, th Avenue North, spoke against the proposal. Ms. Wilson urged to recommend deferring because proposed ordinance not complete, Federal guidelines and standards have not been released, and have concerns about signs being erected on 34 th Street. Barbara Heck, President of CONA, 106 Giralda Blvd. NE, spoke against the proposal. Ms. Heck urged to recommend deferring because proposed ordinance not complete. Page 2 of 5 Trudy Barker, st Avenue South, spoke against the proposal.

3 Travis Jarman, representing CONA, spoke against the proposal. Mr. Jarman urged to recommend deferring. Tom O Neill, V.P of Real Estate and Public Affairs with Clear Channel Communication, spoke in support of the proposal. Mr. O Neill stated that they have been in negotiations with the City for 2 ½ years and this proposal is very favorable for the City and will tremendously improve the outdoor advertising footprint. Mr. O Neill explained their opinion of the Federal study coming out, with Stage 1 determining whether or not electronic billboards are a potential hazard. If a hazard is discovered, then Stage 2 will study lighting, rate of message change, spacing between billboards, road geometry, and developing possible restrictions. Stage 3 will study data on crash fatalities, injuries, and property damages. Mr. O Neill stated that they are not certain of any conclusions the study will provide but strongly feel that the digital displays will continue to be safety-neutral. Commissioner Klein asked what this proposal means money-wise to the City (e.g. monetary loss). Mr. O Neill replied a very small amount, if any. Commissioner Fisher asked if this proposal would allow digital billboards to be placed anywhere in the City. Ms. Weston replied, no. An outdoor advertiser who has billboards in the City will be able to approach the City to enter into an agreement to remove a certain number of billboards in order to have, to add, and/or to replace any existing billboard with a digital billboard and will only be allowed on the roadways listed in the proposal. Commissioner Kehm asked if digital billboards would be located on Gandy Blvd. because it was not mentioned in the discussion. Ms. Weston stated that Clear Channel does not have any billboards on Gandy but would be a roadway appropriate for digital billboards. Commissioner Kehm asked if there are any restrictions for the digital billboards along 34 th Street. Ms. Weston stated that a couple restrictions have been talked about; replacing at existing locations and would be prohibitive within 500-feet from an historic structure or residence. Commissioner Kehm asked about the height measurement. Ms. Weston stated that a series of discussions took place regarding the appropriate way to measure height whether from the ground where the bottom of the structure would be or from the elevation from the roadway where the sign would be visible. The desired regulation would be extremely clear and would also be appropriate City-wide. Ms. Weston continued to say that probably a combination of those two would be appropriate depending where the sign would be located (e.g. a sign along the interstate would be measured from the interstate, itself, and a sign along a surface road would be measured from the existing grade of the roadway). An additional item regarding height is to ensure that a digital billboard will not be significantly higher than the existing signs on-site. All will be included in the revised ordinance. Commissioner Nolan commented that he agrees with CONA to defer this item until further information has been received and then made the following motion. MOTION: Page 3 of 5 Commissioner Nolan moved and Commissioner Kehm seconded to recommend City

4 Council to defer this request for additional revisions to the ordinance and then return a complete ordinance and agreement to the Development Review Commission (DRC) and the Planning & Visioning Commission (PVC) for further discussion. Commissioner Montanari stated his agreement with Commissioner Nolan and then asked about the trading of billboard panels versus billboard structures. Mr. O Neill explained that there is a billboard structure with one to four faces or panels, and billboard faces are the vernacular used to count signs. Commissioner Montanari asked if the digital billboards will be uniform in size. Mr. O Neill stated that they have two standardize sizes; 12 x 25 and 14 x 48. Commissioner Montanari asked if it was correct that there are 180 billboard faces within the City limits to which Ms. Weston stated that this is the best number she has which was ascertained from an old inventory from City records compared with information received from Clear Channel and from another billboard company as well as staff taking physical counts. Commissioner Montanari asked if the City is working with other companies besides Clear Channel to which Ms. Weston replied, yes. Commissioner Melton asked about the 500-feet measurement from a residence. Ms. Weston stated it is measured from the pole, itself. Mr. O Neill added that this is a simplistic deal with a limitation of six or seven digital billboards along the interstate and three to four on the secondary road, and each face will have its own measurement and restrictions. Commissioner Melton asked if 10 digital billboards are the maximum to be put up due to the 2,500 feet distance restriction. Mr. O Neill explained the cap (capacity) and replace concept with a total of 44 faces and a cap of 10 digital billboards within that 44. So, if there are 44 faces and 10 become digital, there will be 34 static bases and 10 digital, and nothing can be added to that within these deals. This gives the City footprint improvement and footprint control because of the capacity limits. Ms. Weston added that in addition to the restriction of numbers, there are restrictions on location. Commissioner Melton asked about signs on facilities (e.g. convention centers, stadiums). Ms. Weston stated that the City currently has provisions in the City Code for this type of sign called a large facility sign. Commissioner Klein commented that he feels that CONA has plenty of time for their input; however, he agrees with the motion. Commissioner Fisher stated that he supports this proposal but the revisions need to be included in the proposed ordinance prior to voting and agrees with the motion. Commission Chair Rogo asked if this issue is foreseen to be involved with the LDRs. Ms. Weston stated that off-premise signs are currently part of the LDRs located in Chapter 16 of City Code, which is the larger set of City Code regulations (Chapters 1 through 30) and the LDRs are a subset. Ms. Weston went on to say that offpremise signs are their own entity and are not a land use, and the content of the sign does not relate in physical proximity or control to a service or business around it. Page 4 of 5 Commissioner Kehm stated her agreement with Commissioner Klein but her concern is with the presentation of

5 a proposed ordinance that is unfinished and feels more time is needed to finalize the ordinance before a vote is taken. Mr. O Neill and Mr. Jarman made final comments in support of their perspective positions on this issue. VOTE: YES Kehm, Montanari, Whiteman, Klein, Fisher, Nolan, Rogo NO - None Motion was approved by unanimous vote of 7-0. ANNOUNCEMENTS None With no further items to come before the Commission, the public hearing was adjourned at 5:40 p.m. Page 5 of 5