Loading...
I06. Ord 1779 - Nonconforming SignsPLANNING FOR THE FUTURE REPORT TO: FROM: SUBJECT MEETING DATE: MDIVTANA Doug Russell, City Manager\ Jarod Nygren, Senior Planner Planning Department 201 1" Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Fax: (406) 758-7739 www.kalispell.com/planning KZTA-16-04 — Zoning Text Amendment Request to Remove the 50% Sign Regulation November 7, 2016 BACKGROUND: A request from Western Neon, Inc. for a zoning text amendment. The zoning text amendment request would amend Section 27.22.170 (Nonconforming Signs and Signs Without Permits) of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. The nature of the request would amend the code to remove portions of the sign ordinance that requires nonconforming signs be brought into compliance when there are cumulative changes of more than 50%. It is proposed that existing nonconforming signs shall be allowed to change sign faces without coming into compliance. The text amendment would apply to all nonconforming signs within the City of Kalispell. The Kalispell Planning Board held a duly noticed public hearing October 11, 2016, to consider the zoning text amendment request. Staff presented staff report KZTA-16-04, providing details of the proposal and evaluation. During the public comment portion of the hearing, the applicant spoke in favor of the request. The applicant felt the regulation put undue burden on business owners, as they are often tasked with replacing signs that they were not aware needed replacement. There being no additional public testimony, the public hearing was closed and a motion was presented to adopt staff report KZTA-16- 04 as findings of fact, and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the proposed amendment be denied. Board discussion concluded that the proposed amendment was not appropriate, and the motion passed unanimously upon roll call vote. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Kalispell City Council deny the application request as recommended by the planning board. FISCAL EFFECTS: There are no anticipated fiscal impacts at this time. ALTERNATIVES: Approve the request. ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report KZTA-16-04 October 11, 2016 planning board minutes Application materials Report compiled: October 28, 2016 c: Aimee Brunckhorst, Kalispell City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. 1779 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CERTAIN PORTIONS OF THE KALISPELL ZONING ORDINANCE (ORDINANCE NO. 1677) AT KMC SECTION 27.22.170, NONCONFORMING SIGNS AND SIGNS WITHOUT PERMITS, AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Western Neon, Inc. submitted a request to the Kalispell City Planning and Zoning Commission to consider certain amendments to the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance regarding nonconforming signs and signs without permits; and WHEREAS, the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission considered the request by the Kalispell Planning Department, took public comment and evaluated the request pursuant to the guidelines of KMC 27.29.020; and WHEREAS, the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission recommended that removing portions of the sign ordinance that requires nonconforming signs be brought into compliance when there are cumulative changes of more than 50% be denied; and WHEREAS, the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission forwarded its recommendation to the Kalispell City Council that requires nonconforming signs be brought into compliance when there are cumulative changes of more than 50% be denied; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Kalispell Planning Department Report and the transmittal from the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission and hereby amends the findings made in Report #K7-TA-16-04 as set forth in Exhibit `B" 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 1. The City of Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, Ordinance No. 1677, is hereby amended as follows on Exhibit "A". SECTION 2. All parts and portions of Ordinance No. 1677 not amended hereby remain unchanged. SECTION 3. 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 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2016. ATTEST: Aimee Brunckhorst, CMC City Clerk Mark Johnson Mayor EXHIBIT "A" 27.22.170: 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: (1) Electronic message boards or signs that blink, flash or change copy in less than five second increments or do not display time and temperature shall be brought into compliance with regard to displayed messages within one year. (2) Signs, on and off -premise, that have been damaged by fire, wind, or other involuntary causes, o ept in the ease ofvandalism, in o o of 50% Of „r f;eplaeement. hi the ease of vaiidalisffl, a b if done within sffiefith". (3) Signs, on and off -premise, which are voluntarily destroyed or removed (except for maintenance not involving structural modification), shall be brought into compliance immediately upon replacement. (4) Discontinued freestanding signs shall be brought into compliance immediately unless part of a multi -panel sign, subject to Section 27.22.170(7). (5) Signs which were unlawfully erected shall be brought into compliance immediately. (6) Signs that are replaced, relocated, reconstructed or requiring structural modification, including modifications to accommodate a change of copy, shall be brought into compliance immediately. (7) Freestanding signs containing removable or replaceable panels shall be brought into compliance when making changes to the structure of the sign. Updated branding, architectural embellishments, painting, and changing of sign faces shall be permitted.wheii sign panels are r-eplaeed-of modifieEL (8) In the event additional right-of-way is purchased by a government agency, any affected sign that must relocate due to the increased right-of-way shall be brought into compliance when replaced. (9) Non -conforming status for signs that blink, rotate, flash, or animate ended on March 19, 1993. CITY OF KALISPELL — ZONING REGULATIONS KALISPELL PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT #KZTA-16-04 September 16, 2016 This is a report to the Kalispell City Planning Board and the Kalispell City Council regarding a request for a text amendment to Section 27.22.170 of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. A public hearing has been scheduled before the Planning Board for October 11, 2016, beginning at 6:00 PM in the Kalispell City Council Chambers. The Planning Board will forward a recommendation to the Kalispell City Council for final action. BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. Petitioner: Western Neon, Inc. — Daniel Therrien 2012 '/2 51h Avenue East Kalispell, MT 59901 B. Area Affected by the Proposed Changes: All properties within the City of Kalispell that have nonconforming signs. C. Proposed Amendment: The changes to the current text of the code section are indicated below. Deletions are struck - out and additions are underlined. 27.22.170: 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: (1) Electronic message boards or signs that blink, flash or change copy in less than five second increments or do not display time and temperature shall be brought into compliance with regard to displayed messages within one year. (2) Signs, on and off -premise, that have been damaged by fire, wind, or other involuntary causes, except in the ease. of vandalismin exeess + 501i. „+ upon-replaeef:nent. in the ease of vandalism, may be restored to original condition .f dene within six Fflenths. (3) Signs, on and off -premise, which are voluntarily destroyed or removed (except for maintenance not involving structural modification), shall be brought into compliance immediately upon replacement. (4) Discontinued freestanding signs shall be brought into compliance immediately unless part of a multi -panel sign, subject to Section 27.22.170(7). (5) Signs which were unlawfully erected shall be brought into compliance immediately. (6) Signs that are replaced, relocated, reconstructed or requiring structural modification, including modifications to accommodate a change of copy, shall be brought into compliance immediately. (7) Freestanding signs containing removable or replaceable panels shall be brought into compliance when making changes to the structure of the sign. Updated branding, architectural embellishments, painting, and changing of sign faces shall be permitted., hen „ cumulative total of i:nore than 50, e (8) In the event additional right-of-way is purchased by a government agency, any affected sign that must relocate due to the increased right-of-way shall be brought into compliance when replaced. (9) Non -conforming status for signs that blink, rotate, flash, or animate ended on March 19, 1993. D. Staff Discussion: Western Neon, Inc. is requesting a text amendment to Section 27.22.170(2) and (7) of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. The text amendment would apply to all nonconforming signs within the City of Kalispell. Section 27.22.170 of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance specifically addresses nonconforming signs and signs without permits. Existing signs that do not conform with the sign provisions of the ordinance, but were legally in place prior to the adoption or application of the ordinance, are considered nonconforming. Generally, signs constructed prior to 1992 are nonconforming if they don't meet the current standards. Section 27.22.170(2) and (7) require that all nonconforming signs shall be removed or brought into compliance when the replacement cost of a sign that has been damaged due to natural causes exceeds 50%, or when a cumulative total of more than 50% of the sign area or panels is replaced ("50% Rule"). The applicant is requesting the 50% rule be removed from the zoning ordinance, which would effectively leave the only means of bringing nonconforming signs into compliance to when changes are made to the structure of the sign. This 50% rule methodology is consistent throughout the zoning ordinance, where uses are typically required to be brought up to current code at various trigger points. For example, when there is a change of use on a property certain aspects are required to be brought up to current standards. Structures are required to come into ADA compliance when a percentage of the construction cost is reached. Other examples include outdoor lighting standards and billboard standards which required them to be brought into compliance within a certain timeframe. In this instance, it has been determined that existing nonconforming signs would not be required to retroactively come into compliance until the 50% rule has been triggered. To date, approximately 35 signs have been brought into compliance through implementing the 50% rule. The idea with the 50% rule is that if a significant amount of money is already being invested into the sign, it would be the appropriate time to bring it into compliance. Generally, the purpose of the sign regulations are to coordinate the type, placement, and physical dimensions of signs within different land -use zoning classifications and put business on a level playing field with each other. In this case, approval of the amendment would not promote the sign regulation objectives that have been created in order to coordinate sign development. Additionally, the request doesn't give equal treatment under the law, where since 1992 new businesses have had to comply with the sign regulations and approximately 35 nonconforming signs have been brought into compliance. New signs would not be on the same playing field as those signs constructed prior to the adoption of the sign ordinance in 1992, both those already constructed over the last 24 years and signs yet to be built. EVALUATION BASED ON STATUTORY CRITERIA This report evaluates the amendment request in accordance with state and local regulations. The statutory basis for reviewing a change in zoning is set forth by Section 27.29.020 of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance and 76-2-303 M.C.A. Findings of Fact for the zone change request are discussed relative to the itemized criteria described by 76-2-304, M.C.A. Is the zoning regulation made in accordance with the growth policy? The proposed amendment is not consistent with the City of Kalispell Growth Policy 2020 in the following ways: Chapter 4, Business and Industry Goal — "Implement standards that ensure a high quality function and design in new development". Since 1992 signs have been required to comply with sign standards implemented to ensure high quality function and design for new development. Nonconforming signs constructed prior to 1992 typically do not meet those standards, thus the city has consistently used the 50% to bring them into conformance with the rest of the new development. Policy — "Encourage the use of innovative land use regulations to achieve a pleasing community entrance ". Prior to 1992 there were no standards in relation to sign standards that would require them to be aesthetically pleasing. Accordingly, sign standards were adopted, including architectural review committee review, in order to ensure new signs within the city were constructed to achieve a pleasing community entrance. Thus, a key way to bring signs into compliance with this standard is through implementation of the 50% rule. To date, numerous signs have been brought into compliance along the city's community entrance corridors through the implementation of both the 50% and billboard attrition regulations. Recommendations — "Review and revise sign standards and polices so that existing non- conforming signs are eliminated through a more aggressive attrition program ". The 50% rule was adopted in 2005 after numerous council and planning board meetings which sought to address this recommendation. Throughout that process there were various options considered for nonconforming sign attrition; such as, immediate compliance, timeframe for compliance, or at the time 50% of the sign was being replaced. It was found that the 50% rule was the softer approach to address the issue, as it was appropriate to require them to come into compliance at the time a significant amount of money was being invested into the sign. The rule also allowed for existing nonconforming signs to remain if they were not being changed. 2. Does the zoning regulation consider the effect on motorized and nonmotorized transportation systems? Prior to 1992 there were no sign regulations that considered the effect on the motorized and non -motorized transportation system. Thus nonconforming signs were constructed within the "clear vision triangle" area of parcels that inhibit vehicular views near intersections. The primary process of correcting this potential traffic and pedestrian hazard is through the implementation of the 50% rule. 3. Is the zoning regulation designed to secure safety from fire and other dangers? The proposed amendment would have little impact. City codes such as building, fire, and zoning regulations, adequately address fire and other dangers. 4. Is the zoning regulation designed to promote public health, public safety, and the general welfare? As with safety from fire and other dangers, the general health, safety, and welfare of the public will be promoted through general city regulations designed to regulate allowable uses when the property is developed or remodeled. Consistent implementation of city codes ensures the general welfare of the public is protected which supports keeping the 50% rule. 5. Does the zoning regulation consider the reasonable provision of adequate light and air? Light and air between and surrounding buildings would not be altered or impacted by the proposed change. These issues would be addressed through the development standards of the zoning district which regulates lot size, setbacks, building height and the types of uses allowed. 6. Is the zoning regulation designed to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, and other public requirements? The proposed amendment would not have an impact on the transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, and other public services. It would negatively impact transportation as it would continue to perpetuate oversized and improperly placed signage adjacent to the roadways. 7. Does the zoning regulation consider the character of the district and its peculiar suitability for particular uses? The 50% rule does consider the character of the city and the suitability of signs. Sign standards have been developed to ensure signs are constructed in a way that coordinates the type, placement, and physical dimensions of signs within different land -use classifications. Nonconforming signs do not meet some aspect of the sign standards aforementioned. The most reasonable way to bring nonconforming signs into compliance with the signs standards is through the implementation of the 50% rule. 8. Does the zoning regulation consider conserving the value of buildings? The value of buildings themselves will not be impacted by this amendment request; however, an important aspect to the value of buildings is the built environment. An important aspect to the built environment is signs, which are regulated through the sign regulations. Signs that do not meet the current sign standards, can negatively impact the built environment, thus negatively impacting values. The most reasonable way to bring signs into compliance with the signs regulations is through implementation of the 50% rule. 9. Does the zoning regulation encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the municipality? The most appropriate land uses throughout the jurisdiction are promoted by encouraging complementary and compatible uses which promote the general well-being of all citizens of the community. As mentioned previously, signs are a major component to the built environment of a city. The sign regulations created in 1992 brought about standards that would promote an appropriate built environment, thus promoting the general well-being of the citizens and community. Removal of the 50% rule would leave no means to bringing nonconforming signs into compliance. Those signs would be able to remain in perpetuity creating an unfair advantage to new business, and in contradiction to the built environment envisioned when the standard was created. It would also undermine a significant city policy/regulation that has been consistently implemented for over a decade. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Kalispell City Planning Board adopt the findings in staff report KZTA- 16-04 and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the proposed amendment be denied as provided herein. Planning Department 201 1st Avenue East Ld Kalispell, MT 59901 Phone: (406) 758-7940 Fax: (406) 758-7739 www.kalispell.com/plannin-LLJ Lq PETITION FOR ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NAME OF APPLICANT: D Q n i'e I j c ci,`e Ej �or �A ; s �� rv, ��° c��,_.� MAILINGADDRESS:R C? / �_ -� G,t � c u c. Ec5 � / CITY/STATE/ZIP: 1�, I ` c C /J / r ;l PHONE: WHAT IS THE PROPOSED ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT? WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OR INTENT OF THE PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT? HOW WILL THE PROPOSED CHANGE ACCOMPLISH THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF: A. Promoting the Growth Policy B. Lessening congestion in the streets and providing safe acces C. Promoting safety from fire, panic and other dangers D. Promoting the public interest, health, comfort, convenience, safety and general welfare E. Preventing the overcrowding of land F. Avoiding undue concentration of population G. Facilitating the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewage, schools, parrs, and other public facilities H. Giving reasonable consideration to the character of the district I. Giving consideration to the peculiar suitability of the property for particular uses 2 J. Protecting and conserving the value of buildings K. Encouraging the most appropriate use of land by assuring orderly growth J � L�1'G iZ, I-,, cce� (A plicant Signature) (Date) 3 PROPOSED AMENDMENT ORIGINAL LANGUAGE 27.22.170: 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: (1) Electronic message boards or signs that blink, flash or change copy in less than five second increments or do not display time and temperature shall be brought into compliance with regard to displayed messages within one year. (2) Signs, on and off -premise, that have been damaged by fire, wind, or other involuntary causes, except in the case of vandalism, in excess of 50% of current or replacement cost shall be brought into compliance immediately upon replacement. In the case of vandalism, a sign may be restored to original condition if done within six months. (3) Signs, on and off -premise, which are voluntarily destroyed or removed (except for maintenance not involving structural modification), shall be brought into compliance immediately upon replacement. (4) Discontinued freestanding signs shall be brought into compliance immediately unless part of a multi - panel sign, subject to Section 27.22.170(7). (5)Signs which were unlawfully erected shall be brought into compliance immediately. (6)Signs that are replaced, relocated, reconstructed or requiring structural modification, including modifications to accommodate a change of copy, shall be brought into compliance immediately. (7) Freestanding 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. (8)ln the event additional right-of-way is purchased by a government agency, any affected sign that must relocate due to the increased right-of-way shall be brought into compliance when replaced. (9) Non -conforming status for signs that blink, rotate, flash, or animate ended on March 19, 1991 PROPOSED CHANGES 27.22.170: 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: (1) Electronic message boards or signs that blink, flash or change copy in less than five second increments or do not display time and temperature shall be brought into compliance with regard to displayed messages within one year. (2) Signs, on and off -premise, that have been damaged by fire, wind, vandalism, or oth,-erp involuntary causes,-ex-Gept}-Er} the Ga , in ex of L C4fl/_ of r rrnnt nr rc r l�n�sr nr��rcy t p't'tC Fi-k3C-tirc J fitt�„,; mnli:�nr�n irytmorli?t�r ,inn r®nl�r mnn! (n th.� r��e__of_-vanrl� lismT, a sine may be restored to F-C-9�i,�nc..,,vy.. S .w �..�rrrr��..�ruvu,� `�'�,- y original condition. if­d­one- ' t#irR—,4X ;^cat#- (3) Signs, on and off -premise, which are voluntarily destroyed or removed (except for maintenance not involving structural modification), shall be brought into compliance immediately upon replacement. (4) Discontinued freestanding signs shall be brought into compliance immediately unless part of a multi - panel sign, subject to Section 27.22.170(7). (5) Signs which were unlawfully erected shall be brought into compliance immediately. (6) Signs that are replaced, relocated, reconstructed or requiring structural modification, including modifications to accommodate a change of copy, shall be brought into compliance immediately. (7) Freestanding signs containing removable or replaceable panels shall be brought into compliance when making changes to the structure of the sign. Updated branding, architectural embellishments, painting, and the changing of sign faces shall be permitted. a-cu t ve-fatal-ef-mor-e4han-5 '"' -aftbe sin area r sig+� r�e~ls af�e-nWacedd-e medified_- (8)ln the event additional right-of-way is purchased by a government agency, any affected sign that must relocate due to the increased right-of-way shall be brought into compliance when replaced. (9) Non -conforming status for signs that blink, rotate, flash, or animate ended on March 19, 1993. PURPOSE OR INTENT OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT The intent of the amendment is to remove the " 50% rule" for existing non -conforming signage. It is proposed that existing non -conforming signs shall be allowed to change sign faces without coming into compliance. The amendment also allows repairs to damaged non -conforming signs for the reasons stated in section (3) regardless of the cost of those repairs. Signs are a permanent structure purchased with the building and propertr Forcing a sign —owner to bring their sign into compliance for changing copy, is akin to asking a business owner to tear down a non- conforming building when they would like to repaint. When a business owner desires to make a change to their signage, a change to the sign faceis typical{}) the least expensive option. The costs associated with changing a face relative to changing the entire structure of the sign often differ by orders of magnitude. Most business owners are unaware of and were uninformed of the "50 rule. The current regulation has the potential to bring about excessive, unexpected, and unnecessary costs. These costs include, but are not limited to the following: (a) Costs associated with removing the existing sign structure (b) Costs associated with design, implementation, and erection of a new sign structure (c) Costs associated with the loss of revenue due to decreased advertising (d) Cost associated with the inability to effectively use signage for advertising as a business owner sees fit. The current regulation is a problem when national or corporate branding changes and business owners are forced to either diverge from their corporate brand or absorb the costs associated with compliance. It is a problem for new business owners who are not informed by the city or by the previous owner that their sign can no longer be changed without coming into compliance. This is a problem in multi -tenant signage where the frequency of copy change is increased, and expected. The current non-cortforrning signage represent a divergence from aesthetic preferences as opposed to substantive.concems. This proposal intends to allow business owners thefreedom to. chan9e.removable t, fetheir business:sarnvproperty ei Intent and purpose of A. Promoting the Growth Policy This change allows non -conforming signs to make changes that reflect updated branding, aesthetic improvements, and more effective advertising. These changes encourage the development and growth of prosperous commercial districts, reduce business costs, and increase small business opportunities. B. Lessen congestion in the streets and providing safe access. Clear, legible, attractive, and accurate signage are necessary for public safety. The current regulation discourages upgrades to existing non -conforming signs. This has the potential to cause drivers to slow to read faded lettering, turn into incorrect business, or miss their intended location. C. Promoting safety from fire, panic and other dangers The ability to update existing non -conforming signage incentivizes business owners to invest in the maintenance of the structure. D. Promoting the public interest, health, comfort, convenience, and general welfare Several of these are covered in sections B and C. E_ Preventing the overcrowding of land The structures in question are pre-existing and not adding to the crowding of land. F. Avoiding undue concentration of population This is unrelated to the amendment. An attempt at correlation would be silly. G. Facilitating the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewage, schools, parks, and other public facilities. This amendment helps local businesses. Local businesses fund the previously mentioned provisions. H. Giving reasonable consideration to the character of the district These are existing structures already inherent to the character of their district. Giving consideration to the peculiar suitability of the property for particular uses This is an amendment to allow businesses with signs to continue using them for their intended purpose. Protecting and conserving the value of buildings This amendment allows business owners to keep their current signage while advertising as they see fit. The current regulation decreases property values by forcing business owners to remove signage. K. Encouraging the most appropriate use of land by assuming orderly growth. This amendment allows existing structures to be utilized for their original intent and purposes.