Loading...
2. Sign OrdinancePlanning Department 201 ls` Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Fax: (406) 758-7739 www.kalispell.com/plannin2 REPORT TO: Doug Russell, City Manager FROM: PJ Sorensen, Kalispell Planning Dept SUBJECT Glacier Peaks/Days Inn Signage Comments DATE: August 7, 2012 At the City Council meeting on August 6, Cary Weyrauch from Glacier Peaks hotel discussed issues relating to their signs during the public comment on the Red Lion sign code amendment. Specifically Mr. Weyrauch stated that the code required them to drop their freestanding sign by "18 inches" when they replaced their signs several years ago and he was concerned with fairness. Council asked for a work session to discuss the background of this matter as they look to the larger issue of working with non- conforming signs. In January, 2008, the Architectural Review Committee noticed recently modified signs at Glacier Peaks and brought them to the city's attention. Staff looked into the matter, and found that Glacier Peaks had changed several sign panels on their property without a sign permit. The signs that were modified had several code problems: (1) the freestanding sign was four feet too tall (not 18 inches as reported at the meeting); (2) the free standing sign incorporated too large of a reader board; and (3) the property utilized a roof sign and roof signs are not allowed in the sign code. Non -conforming sign rules at the time required that when over 50% of the sign area of a sign is modified, the entire sign should be brought up to current standards. After discussing options with Mr. Weyrauch after the fact, the matter was brought to a Council work session on February 11, 2008. A copy of the memo submitted to the council is attached. The outcome of that work session was a compromise that would allow Glacier Peaks to keep their signs with relatively minimal changes. The city agreed to waive an application fee for a zoning text amendment and initiated the amendment on Glacier Peak's behalf. The text amendment (adopted in June 2008) increased the portion of the sign that could be reader board and allowed non -conforming roof signs to be replaced. Those amendments eliminated two of Glacier Peak's main problems. Glacier Peaks was then required to get a permit for the sign work and drop the height of the freestanding pole sign by four feet (by lowering the pole, not cutting off a sign). Later, in 2009, Glacier Peaks obtained a permit for the freestanding sign with the four foot lower height. At that point staff closed the case and concluded that the issue had been resolved. The Planning Board and City Council again looked at the sign provisions of the zoning ordinance in 2010 as part of the comprehensive update to the zoning regulations. The entire sign code was discussed along with the rest of the city zoning ordinance at work sessions with the Planning Board prior to its public hearing, and discussed again with the Council prior to council action. In addition, a committee of the Council and staff went through the ordinance page -by -page before bringing it to the Council for a vote and ultimate adoption in July 2010. Staff is available if you need any additional information. CITY OF KALISPELL CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION AGENDA FEBRUARY 11, 2008 IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING SPECIAL MEETING CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMENT DISCUSSION ITEMS 1. Non -Conforming Signs 2. Proposed Latecomers Agreement — Old School Station MAYOR/COUNCIL/CITY MANAGER COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT Reasonable accommodations will be made to enable individuals with disabilities to attend this meeting. Please notify Theresa White, City Clerk at 758-7756. City of Kalispell Planning Department 17 - 2"d Street East, Suite 211, Kalispell, Montana 59901 Telephone: (406) 751-1850 Fax: (406) 751-1858 Website: www.kalispell.conVplanning REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Tom Jentz, Director James H. Patrick, City Manager SUBJECT: Non -Conforming Signs (50% modification rule) MEETING DATE: February 11, 2008 (work session) BACKGROUND: Recently, it has come to the attention of the council that the Days Inn property on Highway 93 was experiencing some difficulty with their new signage. The council has asked that this issue be placed on a work session so as to understand the issues surrounding the signage question. The issue arose when the Days Inn property changed their name and correspondingly changed the faces of their signage. Briefly, in order to be fair to all businesses in the community, our sign code requires that when any non -conforming sign is modified more than 50%, the whole sign should be brought into compliance with the current code. Both of the Days Inn signs are non -conforming, primarily because of location and height. The sign installer proceeded to change the panels of the signs without contacting this office first. Members of the Architectural Review Committee contacted our office to find out what was happening and we then contacted the Days Inn owners. By way of background, in October of 2005, the City Council approved a revision of the sign ordinance which addressed modifications to existing non -conforming signs. The provision states that non -conforming signs must be brought into compliance when "50% of the sign area or sign panels are replaced or modified." Section 27.24.150(8), Kalispell City Code. Previously, panels could be changed out as long as the work did not involve a structural modification to the sign. The impetuous behind the revised rule was, essentially, fairness. New businesses were installing signs in compliance with the sign ordinance, but older properties (whether existing businesses or new businesses moving into existing buildings) were maintaining much taller and larger signs than their neighbors were allowed. The loophole allowing panels to be changed created a situation where non -conforming signs could be maintained indefinitely, with a competitive disadvantage imposed on newer properties. In order to mitigate the impact of the revised rule, it is only triggered when the sign owner modifies the sign panels. The concept was that the property owner was investing money into the sign and it would be a proper time to address the non -conforming status. Until that step is taken, the non -conforming sign can remain in place as -is. Over the last two years, there have been several signs which have been brought into compliance under this rule. Non -Conforming Signs FeNuary 11,2008 Page 2 Recently, the Days Inn property on Highway 93 North changed its name to Glacier Peaks. The new signs illustrate how the rule works. There are two non -conforming signs which are being replaced. Both signs were in existence in 1992 when the sign ordinance was adopted, and were duly registered. The first sign is mounted on the roof over the carport. It is non -conforming because roof signs (as well as signs projecting above the top of canopies) are not permitted under the code. Sections 27.24.030(7) and 27.24.080(6)(a). The second sign is a freestanding sign. It is non- conforming for multiple reasons. First, it appears that the sign may be too tall and perhaps too large based on its distance from the right-of-way (see Section 27.24.080(1)(d)), although I am awaiting measurements from the owner or the sign company to confirm that. Secondly, the readerboard portion of the sign must be incorporated into the overall design/framework of the sign and cannot exceed 25% of the total sign area. Section 27.24.060(5). This sign appears to exceed the 25% limit and is not incorporated into the overall design. It should be noted that we were not contacted before the work was commenced, and no permit applications were submitted. "Changing a face or other component of a sign is considered an alteration of the sign" and requires a permit, which includes architectural review. Section 27.24.040. Our office spoke with the manager of the hotel, the owner of the hotel, and the sign company. The way we left the matter was that they would identify the right-of-way line, the sign's distance from that line, and the sign dimensions. When we receive that information, we will work with them to identify solutions. RECONDATION: Staff should be directed to continue to work with the applicant to reach a code -compliant solution. ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the Council. Respectfully submitted, Tom Jentz James H. Patrick Director City Manager Report compiled February 6, 2008 C: Theresa White, Kalispell City Clerk January 23, 2008 Mayor and City Council members, Northwest Hospitalities, dba as Days Inn, has changed the motel name to Glacier Peaks Inn. In doing so, the faces in the two signs were changed to reflect this name change. We were unaware that the new city sign ordinance would not allow this. Although the pole sign is now nonconforming with the face change, we need this exposure to maintain business. This has been a well -maintained sign and property for the past 17 years. What we don't understand is why the sign has been conforming all these years and with a simple face change it is not. Please drive by the motel and see that this is still a good- looking sign. Thank you for your consideration on this matter. Northwest Hospitalities ICI-,Y- Cary Weyrauch 755-9662 Planning Department 2011" Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Fax: (406) 758-7739 www.kalispell.com/planning REPORT TO: Kalispell Mayor and City Council FROM: P.J. Sorensen, Planner II James H. Patrick, City Manager SUBJECT: Kalispell Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment - Revisions to Provisions Relating to Non -conforming Signs and Reader Boards - Second Reading MEETING DATE: June 16, 2008 BACKGROUND: This is the second reading on a request to amend the City Zoning Ordinance to revise provisions of the sign regulations relating to non -conforming signs and reader boards. The Kalispell City Council approved the first reading of the ordinance at their regular meeting of June 2, 2008. RECOMMENDATION: A motion to approve the second reading of the ordinance would be in order. FISCAL EFFECTS: The primary fiscal impact would be felt by businesses with non- conforming signage. Those businesses will be able to utilize certain non -conforming, building - mounted signs for a more extensive period. ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Council. Respectfully submitted, CZ� P.J. Sorensen James H. Patric Planner II City Manager Report compiled: June 3, 2008 Cc: Theresa White, Kalispell City Clerk ORDINANCE NO.1639 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE KALISPELL ZONING ORDINANCE (ORDINANCE NO. 1460), BY AMENDING SECTION 27.24, SIGN REGULATIONS, AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Kalispell has submitted a written request to amend the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, by amending Section 27.24, Signs Regulations, and WHEREAS, the request was forwarded to the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission by the Kalispell Planning Department after having been evaluated under 27.30.020, Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, and WHEREAS, the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission recommended that the text of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance be amended by altering the extent to which non -conforming signs would maintain that status when the signage is discontinued or the face of the sign is modified, and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the KPD Report and the transmittal from the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission and hereby adopts the findings made in Report #KZTA-08-1 as the Findings of Fact applicable to this Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The City of Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Ordinance No. 1460, is hereby amended as follows on Exhibit "A". SECTION H. All parts and portions of Ordinance No. 1460 not amended hereby remain unchanged. SECTION M. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND SIGNED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL THIS 16TH DAY OF JUNE, 2008. Pamela B. Kennedy Mayor ATTEST: Theresa White City Clerk EXHIBIT "A" 27.24.060: General Standards for all Signs. (2) An electronic message board provided it displays time and temperature a minimum of every 30 seconds. Sign shall net ee r than 25% of t The electronic �+ u=� message shall not change in increments of less than five seconds and shall not use flashing or blinking characters. The use of red and green lights in the display and streaming video eeles, ' li _ewaa %4th tmffie signs sueh as fed or- gFeen; are prohibited. (5) A sign may include electronic and manually changeable reader boards No more than 25% of any sign area may incorporate an electronic reader boar and no more than 50 % of any sign area may incorporate a manually changeable reader board. In no event shall the percentage of sign area occupied by reader board exceed 50%. The reader board portion shall be architecturally incorporated into the overall design of the sign. No such sign shall be considered to be architecturally incorporated unless the reader board is contiguous to the remainder of the sign face and is bounded by the same or similar framework. 27.24.150: Nonconforming Signs and Signs Without Permits. Existing signs that do not conform to the provisions of these regulations but were legally in place prior to the adoption or application of this ordinance, are considered non -conforming. All non -conforming signs shall be removed or brought into compliance with these regulations as follows: (5). Discontinued freestanding signs shall be brought into compliance immediately unless part of a multi -panel sign, subiect to Section 27.24.150(8). (8). Freestanding sSigns containing removable or replaceable panels shall be brought into compliance when a cumulative total of more than 50% of the sign area or sign panels are replaced or modified.