Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
4. Ordinance 1639 - Zoning Text Amendment - Sign Regulations - 1st Reading
PIannng Department 201 1" Avenue East Kalispell, NIT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Pax: (406) 758-7739 www.kalispeR.com/pla RRn REPORT TO: Kalispell Mayor and City Council FROM: P.J. Sorensen, Planner H James H. Patrick, City Manager SUBJECT: Kalispell Zoning ordinance Text Amendment - Revisions to Provisions Relating to Non -conforming Signs and Reader Boards MEETING DATE: June 2, 2008 BACKGROUND: The Kalispell City Planning Board met on May 13, 2008, and held a public hearing to consider a request for a zone text amendment which alters the extent to which non -conforming signs would maintain that status when the signage is discontinued or the face of the sign is modified. The proposal would also allow manually changeable reader boards to occupy up to 50% of a sign face, while limiting certain electronic messages. This proposal is based on direction from the City Council following two work sessions focused on non -conforming signs. P.J. Sorensen, of the Kalispell Planning Department, presented staff report #RZTA-08-01 providing details of the proposal and the evaluation. one letter of support was received prior to the meeting. No one spoke either for or against the zone change at the public hearing. The board recommended the council approve the proposal on a 4-µ2 vote. one of the dissenting votes was based upon general disagreement with the sign regulations. The other dissenting vote was based upon a general feeling that the amendment is not necessary. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adopting the first reading of the ordinance to amend the Kalispell Zoning ordinance as recommended by the planning board. 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, P.J. Sorensen James H. Patrick Planner II City Manager Report compiled: May 27, 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 EFTECTIVE 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 Comn-iission 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 KALIS PELL AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The City of Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Ordinance No. 1460, is hereby amended as follows on Exhibit "A". SECTION II. All parts and portions of Ordinance No. 1460 not amended hereby remain unchanged. SECTION III. 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 K.A.LISPELL THIS 2ND DAY OF JUNE, 2008. Pamela B . Kennedy Mayor ATTEST: Theresa white City Clerk EXHIBIT ".A►." 27,24,060: General Standards for all Signs. r r r (2) An electronic message board provided it displays time and temperature a minimum of every 30 seconds. ' . The electronic 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 , nin iunn ni innninn loon nnmmnnnuni nnnnnmmrnnnrrr AffiF =Leen, are prohibited. r r r (5) A sign may include electronic and manually,changeable reader boards. No more than 25 %n of any sign area may incorporate an electronic reader board and no more than 50 % of any sign area ma incorporate a manualmanualL chap eable reader board. In no event shall the percentage of sin area occupied b reader board exceed 50 % r 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-confonming. All non -conforming signs shall be removed or brought into compliance with these regulations as follows: ■ r r (5). Discontinued freestanding signs shall be brought into compliance immediately unless part of a multi -panel sign subject to Section 27.24,150 S . r r r (8). Freestandin s&igns 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. Nanning Department 201 1" Avenue East Kalispell, SIT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Fax.- (406) 758-7739 www.kal'ispell.com/ tannin May 27, 2008 James H . Patrick, city Manager City of Kalispell P.O. Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 Re: Kalispell Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment - Revisions to Provisions Relating to Non- conforming Signs and. Reader Boards Dear Jim: The Kalispell city Planning Board met on May 13, 2008, and held a public hearing to consider a request for a zone text amendment which alters the extent to which non -conforming signs would maintain that status when the signage is discontinued or the face of the sign is modified. The proposal would also allover manually changeable reader boards to occupy up to 50% of a sign face, while limiting certain electronic messages. This proposal is based on direction from the City council following two work sessions focused on non -conforming signs. P.J. Sorensen, of the Kalispell Planning Department, presented staff report #KZTA--08-01 providing details of the proposal and the evaluation. one letter of support was received prior to the meeting. No one spoke either for or against the zone change at the public hearing. The board recommended the council approve the proposal on a 4-2 vote. Please schedule this matter for the June 2, 2008, regular city council meeting. You may contact this board or P.J. Sorensen at the Kalispell Planning Department if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely, Kalispell City Planning Board Bryan H. Schutt President Attachments: Staff report #KZTA-08-01 Draft Minutes of the 5/ 13/08 planning board meeting c ter/ Att: Theresa white, Kalispell city Clerk CITY OF KALISPELL - SIGN REGrULATIONS KALISPELL PLANNINGr DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT #KZTA-08-1 MAY 13, 2008 This is a report to the Kalispell City Planning Board and the Kalispell City Council regarding a request for a text amendment to the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance to revise (1) the manner in which non -conforming signs are treated and (2) standards applicable to reader boards. A public hearing has been scheduled before the Planning Board for May 13, 2008, beginning at 7:00 PM in the Kalispell City Council Chambers. The Planning Board will forward a recommendation to the Kalispell City Council for final action BACKGROUND INFORMATION The City of Kalispell is proposing to amend the sign regulations contained in the Kalispell zoning ordinance 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. The proposal also would allow manually changeable reader boards to occupy up to 50% of a sign face, while limiting certain electronic messages. This proposal is based on direction from the City Council following two work sessions focused on non -conforming signs. A. Petitioner: James H. Patrick, City Manager City of Kalispell P.O. Box 1997 Kalispell, MT 59903 (406) 755--7703 B. Area Effected by the Proposed Changes: Any area within the Kalispell zoning jurisdiction could be affected by these proposed standards. C. Proposed Amendments: The specific amendments are as follows: 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. T-hed. �� m��qt b_e ' o W.& ��_�-- arThe electronic message shall not change in increments of less than five seconds and shall not use flashing or blinking characters. The use of red and reen lights in the display and streaming video it as z,d i r ffee n, are prohibited. Page 1 of 5 (5) A sign may include electronic and manually changeable reader boards. No more than 25% of any sign area may incorporate an electronic reader board and no more than 50% of any sin area may incor orate a manually changeable reader board. In no event shall the percentage of sin 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 reestand .ink signs shall be brought into compliance immediately unless part of a multi -panel sign, subject to Section 27.24.15D S . (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. D. Staff Discussion: The current sign regulations were adopted in 1992, with an update in 2005. The 2005 amendment included 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 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. Page 2 of 5 One of the other 2005 revisions reduced the percentage of a sign face which could utilize reader boards. Prior to 2005, the limit was 75%. The 2005 amendment reduced the limit to 25%. The revision did not differentiate between manually changeable reader boards and electronic reader boards. Now that we have a couple years of experience with those revisions, a few things carve to light. First, the primary focus of the rule regarding non- conforming signs was large freestanding signs. Building -mounted signs (such as wall signs) generally do not generate the same level of concern, but they are brought under the same rule. Second, limiting reader boards to no more than 25% of a sign face was geared towards electronic signs and the glare they generate. It has created problems, however, with smaller monument signs such as seen in conjunction with churches, schools, and offices. Many zones limit freestanding sign faces to 24 square feet, leaving just 6 square feet for the reader board. It has become apparent that limiting manually changeable reader boards is not necessary to accomplish the primary goal of the rule, and functions in a manner which prevents reasonable use of manual reader boards in some areas. The City Council directed staff to develop amendments to help alleviate this situation. First, staff recommends that the 50% modification rule (which requires that when any non -conforming sign is modified more than. 50%, the whole sign should be brought into compliance with the current code) be modified to apply only to freestanding signs, with any building --mounted signs such as wall signs or roof signs allowed to continue its non -conforming status if the structural framework is not altered. Second, staff recommends that we keep electronic reader boards at the current 25%, but that we increase the allowable percentage of manual reader boards to 50%. EVALUATION BASED ON STATUTORY CRITERIA The statutory basis for reviewing a change in zoning is set forth by 76-2-205, M. C.A. Findings of Fact for the zone change request are discussed relative to the itemized criteria described by 76-2-203, M.C.A. 1. Does the re nested zone comply with the growth polioy2. Reasonable regulations of signage are consistent with the growth policy's goals, intent, and objectives. The growth policy recognizes that keeping signs simple and straight -forward reduces clutter and allows for easy comprehension without undue distraction. 2. Is the requested zone designed to lessen congestion in the streets? Consistent signage within the streetscape helps create a better driving environment and better traffic flours. Page 3 of 5 3. will the requested zone secure safely from firePanic, and other dangers? As noted above, consistent signage creates a better driving environment. 4. will the requested change promote the health and general welfare? The general health and welfare of the public will be promoted by mitigating traffic impacts in the street. S. will the requested zone rovide for adequate light and air? The signage provisions contain provisions which help provide adequate light and air. 6. will the requested zone prevent the overcrowding of land or undue concentration of people? The sign regulations have little direct impact on the intensity of the use of land, although they do help ensure that signage is consistent with the intensity allowed in that particular zone. 7. Will the requested zone facilitate the adequate rovision of transportation, water sewera e schools arks and other public requirements? The amendments are most closely tied to transportation, and are designed to help guide traffic with clear, consistent signage, by avoiding a cluttered streetscape, and by reducing glare from electronic signage. S. Does the re uested zone give consideration to the particular suitability of the -properly for particular uses? The sign regulations seek to limit signage in residential and other lower intensity areas, while allowing more flexibility in commercial zones. 9. Does the re uested zone &ive reasonable consideration to the character of the rli etri rt? The proposed amendment gives reasonable consideration to the character of the districts in which the changes are being proposed and does not alter the intent or character of those zoning districts. 10. will the proposed zone conserve the value of buildings? The building values will be conserved by promoting and encouraging reasonable standards within zoning districts by providing consistent signage among similarly zoned properties. 11. will the requested zone encourage the most a ro riate use of the land throughout the jurisdiction? Page 4 of 5 By providing for consistent signage throughout similar zones, the most appropriate use for a property is encouraged. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board adopt the findings in staff report KZTA-08-1 and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the proposed amendments to the sign regulations be adopted as provided herein. Pis Page 5 of 5 Ua/ 1 Z/ :Z1jelj 01 : 1 ( 41-1b lbbUd d l ViCKIEHUYNTEH NAVE 02 for FLATHEAD April 25, 2008 INDUSTRIES 66 4th Avenue W.N. J - Sorensen Pa. Box 1916 Kalispell Planning Department Kalispell, MT 59903.191 fi 201 1 "'Avenue East Phone �405 755-765e Kalispell, MT 59901 t Fax (408) 756-7787 www.flatheadindustries,org Dear P.J.: 11 It is my understanding that the City of Kalispell is considering a i cermer ConnetWons proposed zoning tent amendment to rules affecting non -conforming Supported Employment building --mounted signs. Flathead Industries fully supports this Job Placement € amendment! Thrift stores If here Is anything i can do to assist you in this endeavor, please do 3 Valley l~,oGations Gluafty Donations not hesitate to contact me. Pr©duaWon Sincerely, Product Assembly Badges: Rags, Mailings r supponed Uving t .•G Independence Ownership, Pride Vickie L. Poynter y CEO, Flathead Industries ■ Croup Home Living Family Environment Individualized Service Recreation Enhance Health Build Canfidonce Creating Opportunities for People with Disabilities A Nun-Prvft Omwation * Acwe&.ed by GARF ((;gmmiaaion of Aceraftabon of Aehabilm6on Fediier) KALISPELL CIT'"Y' PLANNINGr BOARD & ZONING COMMUSSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING MAY 1.39 2008 CALL TO ORDER. AND ROLL The regular meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board CALL and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Board members present were: John Ilinchey, Rick Dull, Jim Williamson, C.M. (Butch) Clark, and Troy Mendius. Richard Griffin was absent. P.J. Sorensen and Sean Conrad represented the Kalispell Planning Department. There were 3 people in the audience. INTRODUCTION OF NEW President Schutt welcomed new planning board member MEMBER Trop Mendius to the board. Richard Griffin, the board's other new member will be in attendance starting with the June 10, 2008 meeting. APPROVAL OF NHNUT S Clark moved and Williamson seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the April S, 2005 Kalispell City Planning Board meeting. ROLL CALL The motion passed on a roll call vote of 5 in favor and one abstention. DEAR THE PUBLIC Mayre Flowers, Citizens for a Better Flathead asked if the planning board has considered revisiting the issue of a possible redesign of the Kalispell Bypass for the community to review. She said she thinks it should be considered and she would be happy to assist in bringing the parties together. CITY OF KALISPELL NON- A request by the City of Kalispell to amend. Sections CONFOR1Vi NG SIGN 27.24.060 and 27.24.150 of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance REGULATIONS TEXT relating to sign regulations. The specific provisions would AMENDMENT govern the extent to which non --conforming signs would maintain that status when the signage is discontinued or the face of the sign is modified. The proposal would also allow manually changeable reader boards to occupy up to 50% of a sign face, while limiting certain electronic messages. STAFF REPORT KZTA-08-01 P.J. Sorensen, representing the Kalispell City Planning Department reviewed staff report KZTA--08-01 for the board. The specific amendments are as follows: 27.24.060: General Standards for all Signs. (2) An electronic message board provided it displays time and temperature a mm* imum of every 30 seconds. ' o aFea: The electronic message shall not change in Kalispell City Punning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 13, 2008 Page 1 of 11 increments of less than five seconds and shall not use flashing or blinking characters. The use of red and Teen lights in the display and streaming video are prohibited. (5) A sin may include electronic and manuall changeable reader boards. No more than 25% of any sign area may incorporate an electronic reader board and no more than 50% of aLa sign area ma incorpprate a manually changeable reader board. In no event shall the percentage of sin area occu ied 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 freestandlatz signs shall be brought into compliance immediately unless part of a multi - panel sign subject to Section 27.24.1,5D 8 . (8). Freestanding s-Signs 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. One letter of support for these amendments was received from Flathead Industries. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission adopt staff report KZTA-08--01 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the proposed amendments to the sign regulations be adopted as recommended in the staff report. Hull asked what prompted these amendments and Sorensen said there were a number of situations that carve up where businesses needed to change their signs. The city council looked at these issues at recent work sessions and this proposal was put together based on council's direction. Hull asked if the sign at Flathead Industries 'Thrift Store would be affected. Sorensen elained it would affect their Kalispell City Punning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 13, 2008 Page 2 of I I signs. They have a non--conformming freestanding sign and a non-conforrn.ing wall sign that sits above the roofline. If this goes through, Sorensen said, the non --conforming freestanding sign would have to be brought into conformance and the roof sign would be allowed as a non- conforming sign.. Clark asked for further clarification and Sorensen explained. Williamson asked for a definition of discontinued freestanding signs which Sorensen provided. Williamson quoted from the staff report that states "non- conforming signs could be maintained indefinitely with a competitive disadvantage imposed on newer properties." and asked if staff is acknowledging there is a value to signs that are legally non --conforming. Sorensen said to some degree but if you are talking about amortization schedules and someone argued that it was some sort of a regulatory taking you would be looking at a 7-year amortization. Sorensen provided an example. Sorensen added they didn't think it would be fair to allow a certain business to have a sign that was 3-5 times larger than a competitor next door who was restricted on their signage. The idea was to put everyone on a level playing field and not create disproportionate amounts of signage. Williamson said it shouldn't be the government's role to level the playing field in business because business is competitive. Clark agreed with Williamson.. Sorensen said the simple fact that a sign is non -conforming doesn't trigger the regulations it is when a business wants to change their sign. The current regulations cover any gall or freestanding sign if the sign is discontinued or if 50% is changed the sign loses its non -conforming status and then has to be brought into conformance. Schutt said he philosophically agrees with the amendments. Williamson asked why the time and temperature has to be displayed every 30 seconds on electronic reader boards. Sorensen said that isn't part of the amendment being proposed but it is industry standard and provides a public service. Williamson said if the city dictates content it could be a liability issue and Sorensen said he doesn't think it would be a substantial concern. Hull asked for further clarif cation on the Sportsman/ Flathead Industries sign and Sorensen responded. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 13, 2008 Page 3 of I I Clark asked if the LC Staffing sign was conforming. Sorensen said programming of their sign has recently been addressed by our Code Enforcement Officer and staff is trying to bring it into compliance. Clark thought the sign was dangerous because it is red and conflicts with the signal. Sorensen said they have been running into this issue and that is why red and green colors are not allowed on the reader boards. APPLICA111T/ CONSULTANTS None. PUBLIC HEARING President Schutt opened the public hearing and there being no one wishing to speak the hearing was closed. MOTION Hinchey moved and Schutt seconded a motion to adopt staff report KZTA--08--01 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the Non -Conforming Sign Text Amendment be approved as noted in the staff report. BOARD DISCUSSION Hull said having participated in several meetings regarding the sign regulations this is a very controversial issue. The basic concern for the city is aesthetics. Hull added he is concerned about the wall mounted sign at the old Sportsman building (now Flathead Industries Thrift Store) because it is not attractive and he is disappointed that it will not be removed. Mendius asked if there is any precedent or has there been any consideration in this proposal for someone who might want to exploit these stipulations by constructing a sign that had the 25% electronic reader board and 50% manually changeable reader board? Sorensen said they would not be able to do both and he referenced the amendments. Schutt asked if they would be able to use a 25% manual and 25% electronic sign and Sorensen said he hasn't encountered this and added the concern has been with the electronic boards. Hinchey said he shared Sch.utt's concern and suggested an amendment that would read "a sign may include either electronic or manually changeable reader board". Sorensen agreed that would be a way to do it and Clark suggested another location in the regulations for this amendment. Further discussion was held and no formal motion on the amendment was made. ROLL CALL The original motion passed on a roll call vote of 4 in favor and 2 opposed. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 13, 2008 Page 4 of I I