ZONING CODE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE

200 E. Wells Street City of Milwaukee Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202 Meeting Minutes ZONING CODE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE TEODROS MEDHIN, CHAIR Stuart Mukamal, Ed Richardson, Ronald Roberts Staff Assistant, Chris Lee, 286-2232 Fax: 286-3456, clee@milwaukee.gov Legislative Liaison, Ted Medhin, 286-8680, tmedhi@milwaukee.gov Wednesday, June 24, 2015 2:30 PM Room 301-B, 3rd Fl., City Hall Meeting convened at 2:32 p.m. Present - Roberts, Richardson, Mukamal, Medhin Individuals also present: Jeff Osterman, Legislative Reference Bureau 1. 150280 A substitute ordinance relating to the regulation of automatic changeable message signs. Sponsors: Ald. Witkowski Dr. Medhin said that the committee can review both versions of the ordinance, Substitute 1 and Proposed Substitute A. Mr. Richardson questioned the intent of the ordinance. Aaron Cadle, Legislative Reference Bureau, said that the intent is to regulate the illumination of automatic changeable message signs near residential districts, right-of-ways, and public ways. The proposed substitute goes a little further and sets an appeal process similar to the process that the Department of Neighborhood Services (DNS) uses. On an informal basis, an aggrieved party has the current ability to appeal to the DNS commissioner to review and rule on a situation more closely via a formal hearing. As a last resort, an aggrieved party can appeal to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BOZA). With an appeal process, perhaps all other provisions of the proposed substitute may pass from a political position. Ald. Terry Witkowski, 13th Aldermanic District, said that proposed ordinance to regulate illumination of these signs is an alternative to the proposed ordinance currently being considered by the Zoning, Neighborhoods and Development (ZND) Committee regarding the frequency of changing messages on on-premise automatic changeable message signs. Regardless whether or not the frequency of changing messages of on-premise signs stays at 60 seconds, reverts back to 30 seconds, or is amended to 8 seconds similar to off-premise signs, the majority of these signs will still be in violation. His office has not experienced any issues or public complaint regarding the frequency of messages changing on these signs. The problem is illumination and not the frequency of messages changing. City of Milwaukee Page 1 ZONING CODE TECHNICAL Meeting Minutes June 24, 2015 COMMITTEE Members discussed concerns. Atty. Mukamal said that the political standpoint is not a valid reason for the zoning code change. Additionally, the proposed appeal process is duplicative and unnecessary due to there being an existing appeal process in place in the zoning code whereby orders from the DNS commissioner can be appealed to BOZA by an aggrieved party. There is no reason to distinguish the subject matter of the proposed ordinance from any other matter over which the DNS commissioner has authority under Chapter 295. Mr. Roberts said that the procedure to appeal to the DNS commissioner is written in the zoning code and applies only to emergency conditions that affect the health and safety of the public. This procedure is not designed to undermine other appelate bodies, which the proposed appeal procedure may do. Mr. Roberts added that the proposed ordinance would be difficult to enforce. The environmental division of DNS, which has the responsibility to enforce code provisions relating to glare, has concerns. The division may not have the necessary technical equipment to test or measure lighting elements. Other concerns include the possible prohibition of illuminated window signs and the lack of addressing ambient light measurement. Mr. Richardson said that the proposed ordinance conflicts and is contrary to other existing provisions in Chapter 295 that prohibit or regulate these signs in residential zoning districts. Section 295-505-5 prohibits illumination of signs between 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. Section 295-407 prohibits a sign from being within 400 feet of residential districts from which the sign face is visible. Other parts of ch. 295 or other chapters of the City code cover the measurability of lighting elements and visibility. Mr. Richardson added that many of these signs exist in residential zoning districts, via schools and churches, despite existing ordinances. A straight ban on these signs from being within 100 feet of residential districts will be problematic for those signs unaffected by the ordinance due to having their backsides facing the districts, which may be common. Ald. Witkowski said that he is open to a compromise and necessary changes to the proposed ordinance so it can be acceptable and enforceable. Some provisions of the proposed legislation, such as the appeal process, came from Ald. James Bohl, chair to ZND. Members had additional comments and concerns. Atty. Mukamal said that there are unintended drafting issues that need addressing. Some terms are vague and have definitional issues, such as “night time”, “day time”, and “facing away”. Provisions e-5, e-6, e-7, and e-8 need clarification as to whether they apply to residential districts or open to the whole city. Perhaps the legislation, at the front end, can be clarified to apply only to residential districts. The provisions in par. e are fixable, legal, and can be upheld if the inconsistencies with other provisions of the code can be resolved. Lindsey St. Arnold, BOZA, said that BOZA does not have the technical ability to make rulings over matters violating the technical lighting elements referenced in the proposed ordinance. Mr. Roberts said that the enforcement vehicle and requirements of the DNS City of Milwaukee Page 2 ZONING CODE TECHNICAL Meeting Minutes June 24, 2015 COMMITTEE environmental division concerning glare, ambient light, and other lighting elements are through another section of the City code. Mr. Richardson and Roberts said that said due to drafting issues and conflicts with other provisions of the City code, further discussion outside of the committee should occur to further the intent of the ordinance, make revisions, and strengthen existing provisions. Atty. Mukamal said that BOZA may not be equipped to rule on lighting elements due to being a land use body and not a scientific review body. Although not illegal, sub f. should be eliminated or placed outside of ch. 295. There should be further review if an in-house departmental review is needed and if the process of going to BOZA or another appelate body can be streamlined. Members discussed that further review outside of the committee may lead to changes outside of ch. 295, such as ch. 80, and may or may not require a new ordinance and future review by the committee. Atty. Mukamal moved that both versions of the ordinance, Substitute 1 and Proposed Substitute A, meets the standard of legality (despite concerns over vagueness); do not meet the standards of enforceability, administrative efficiency, and consistency with the format of the zoning code due to serious concerns with compliance to these standards; and that a proper version meeting all standards can emerge through a redraft. Mr. Richardson seconded. There were no objections. 2. 141580 A substitute ordinance relating to various revisions to the zoning code. Sponsors: THE CHAIR Mr. Richardson said that the proposed ordinance is related to the Local Business Action Team. It addresses three different areas. First, the proposed legislation loosens up regulations regarding the production of alcoholic beverages, which is currently a subset of heavy manufacturing. The proposed ordinance creates a definition for alcoholic beverage production, permits the production in most industrial districts, and makes it a special use in local business districts where it is not permitted. Secondly, the proposed ordinance will make food production in most of the commercial zoning districts easier. Lastly, the proposed ordinance separates kidney dialysis facilities from medical service facilities and places the facilities under medical office to make it easier for the facilities going forward. Atty. Mukamal questioned brewpub and pointed out the need for a good legislative record. Mr. Richardson replied that the idea with the brewpub is to ensure that taverns have the right to brew their own alcohol beverages. He added that he can provide a written record to justify the ordinance. Mr. Roberts moved that the proposed ordinance meets the standards of legality and enforceability, administrative efficiency, and consistency with the format of the zoning code subject to a legislative record being made. Atty. Mukamal seconded. There were no objections. Meeting adjourned at 3:15 p.m. Chris Lee, Staff Assistant City of Milwaukee Page 3 ZONING CODE TECHNICAL Meeting Minutes June 24, 2015 COMMITTEE City of Milwaukee Page 4