Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA00-005Ua _003E' T
May 21,2001 Renton City Council Minutes Page 162
OLD BUSINESS Planning and Development Committee Vice Chair Briere presented a report
Planning&Development regarding A-frame signs. The Planning and Development Committee met to
Committee evaluate the A-frame sign regulations one year after adoption, and to discuss
Development Services: A- whether the regulations should remain in effect. The Committee determined
Frame Signs that the regulations respond to requests by local businesses for A-frame or
sandwich board portable signage, and that the permitting and enforcement
associated with the signs does not create a hardship on City staff.
The Committee recommended that the A-frame sign regulations(RMC 4-4-
100J)remain in effect,and that RMC Section 4-1-14M3 (Fees)be amended to
adopt fees for A-frame sign permits. The recommended fees for A-frame signs
are$100 for the first sign and$50 per sign for each thereafter. The period of
validity for the A-frame signs is recommended to be for 12 months.
The Committee further recommended that the City Attorney prepare the
ordinance amending the Code and present it to Council for first reading.
MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN
THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED.
Utilities Committee Utilities Committee Chair Briere presented a report concurring with the staff
Utility: Sewer Connection by recommendation that Council approve the proposed modification to City Code
Property Owners Outside City Section 4-6-040.0 requiring annexation covenants be executed for sewer
Limits,City Code Revision connection in the City's potential annexation area.
The Committee further recommended that the ordinance for this revised code
be presented for first reading. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY
CORMAN,COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT.
CARRIED. (See page 164 for ordinance.)
Utility: May Creek Basin Plan Utilities Committee Chair Briere presented a report regarding the May Creek
Agreement,King County& Basin Action Plan and Implementation Interlocal Agreement adoption. The
Newcastle Utilities Committee recommended concurrence with staff recommendation that
Council adopt the May Creek Basin Action Plan.
The Committee recommended that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to
execute the May Creek Basin Action Plan Implementation Interlocal Agreement
with King County and the City of Newcastle. The Committee further
recommended that the resolution regarding this matter be presented for reading
and adoption. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY PARKER, COUNCIL
CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See page 164 for
resolution.)
Transportation(Aviation) Transportation(Aviation)Committee Member Briere presented a report
Committee regarding the airport restaurant building demolition and recommended that
Airport: Restaurant Building Council:
Demolition
1. Permit demolition of the entire restaurant building to proceed,as previously
authorized by Council on 2/14/2000.
2. Not accept the two informal proposals for utilization of the ground area on
which the restaurant is presently located.
3. Authorize the Airport to transfer sufficient funds from the Airport Fund
Reserve,if necessary,to cover the demolition costs established by
competitive bidding.
MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY PARKER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN
THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED.
i
yy ,Seattle'Pos n e 1 •nc"-r.s: ' on lllf''' e r
PERSONAL FINANCE
For the first offense, the'sign owner is asked to
remove the. board. If it shows 5p again, the .city will
impound the sign and charge$35 if the owner wants It
back.
In other cities,it's not'as easy,or as cheap. ,' ,
The Bellevue City Council takes p dim view of
sidewalk signage.
The city has one of the most restrictive anti-clutter
laws in the state when it comes to outdoor advertising:no
r balloons, banners, pennants or signs on stakes in the
ground.
The City Council is very,very proactive on opposing
signs," said Jim Gough, the code compliance supervisor
MULADY for the city of Bellevue. "Most cities don't allow them ..
y anymore.They are a visual blight if you have a whole lot
PI REPORTER of them."
The Bellevue council has increased enforcement and
Sandwich board signs,sprinkled along city sidewalks raised fines to$100 per day for each.sign.
in front of shops hold a quaint charm for some. The There is very,very,very strict enforcement,"GoughA-frame signs advertise the coffee of the day, a lunch
special, new merchandise, or simply
p
oint the way to a See SIGNS,Page E5 ,
business.
Others find the signs intrusive, messy and even Signs: Price for first
hazardous. S '
Although most cities are doing a ay with sandwich A:frame sign is $100
board signs, Renton, which had a rarely enforced code
prohibiting signs for years, has done an about-face and
now allows the two-sided signs,with a permit. From Page El
At least temporarily.
Renton is bucking a growing trend.About two dozen said.
of Washington's larger cities have taken steps in recent That's probably why you don't
years to ban the signs ranging from tlie sandwich see a lot of sandwich board signsboards
around Bellevue," Gough said. "We
that clutter pedestrian paths to vista-blocking billboards
and flapping banners. are doing our best to keep Bellevue
John Zavis, who oversees annual street.use•permits visually clean."
for the city of Seattle, .said sandwich boards are In Renton — where the city
strictly prohibited in Seattle,•"excep where they are
1 charges $100 a year for the 'first
allowed."A-frame sign and$50 each for'every
The signs are generally OK in areas where a' additional sign — the sign debate
co mmunitycmmunity group is willing to police them and make sure began as a'sort of business-to-busi- •
regulations regarding size and placement are followed. ness feud. When some Renton resi-
Sandwich signs are allowed at the Pike Place Market dents complained about an adult
by charter, and there is no permit fee. They're also video store, the store-owner turned
I allowed in Pioneer Square and the Broadway Business the tables and complained about their
Improvement Area, where the.business association pays illegal sidewalk signs and insisted the '.
the city an annual fee of $68. Elsewhere, they aren't. city rules banning the boards be
allowed,though they're clearly in use in areas such as the • enforced.
1 University District or on Northwest Market in.Ballard There had also been complaints
where a variety of signs decorate the sidewalks. ' from people using wheelchairs who
Real estate signs and special went boards 'are couldn't maneuver through the maze.
considered temporary and are allowed thin reason. This process was started quite a
Eleanor Hartmann, co-owner of the Penny Cafe in long time ago," said Paul Baker,
Ballard, sets her sandwich board o•,it 'each morning, Renton's code compliance officer.
1 . offering a free latte to anyone who wor cs in the career-of- you could look at this as a test year.
the-"Fee It is going to be reviewed at the endlatteforballoonists," the sign read Friday.
Other days, receptionists,. marine biologists, drummers of the year.
and zoo docents have been offered 'coffee drinks.
Hartmann,who has had the sidewalk sign since January, P-I reporter Kathy Mulady
said she didn't know if they were alloyed or not. • can be reached at 206-448-8131
As long as no one has busted us,I just keep sticking or kathymulady@seattle-pi.com
it out there,"she said. "It attracts a'lot of attention, it is I '
fun and it's"a good conversation starter1" '
In Seattle, sandwich•:boards rdnk low on the
enforcement agenda, unless someone omplains. In that•
case,a city representative is sent to ch1ck on the sign. _ '
I
I
signs Firingf® sandwich board .New rules g .
By Claire Booth Now,the way a sign is regu-. otherlandscapinglocated between By h ..)
Journal Reporter liated depends on where 'the a sidewalk and a street,however. . Jo
business is located. • In all cases,signs may be no
RENTON — Starting tomor- In the city center/downtown more than 3 feet tall and 32 inch-.PACIFIC
row, sandwich-board signs . area,pedestrian safety require- es wide. Each sign must have Pacific Polio
throughout the city will be sub- ments mean that businesses its permit number in the upper . without jus
ject to new regulations.have to place the signs against left-hand corner. Permits cost cheap.
A new ordinance,'passed by their buildings.They must keep $100 for business' first sign, Reach e
the City Council last month,will a minimum of 4 feet clear on and$50 for each additional sign. - Olympia las
limit where the signs can go and every sidewalk. • Because the signs can be locat-. been on pale
how big they can be.Permits for The city center sign regula- ed in public access areas;a busi- since Marcl
all sandwich boards also called tion area runs from approxi- ness owner seeking a permit must edged that
A-frame signs,will be required.
r
mately South Fifth Street north .bring the city a certificate from ;ting into sip
The new regulations replace o South Tobin Street,and from .his insurance company and a He saic
ainier Avenue South east to . hold-harmless agreement,Baker communic:
the moratorium on A-frame sign• the Cedar River. said. "That gives us protection, since Marc:
enforcement that was approved . Outside that section of the limits our liability,"he said.
by the City Council in May 1998.
talk of a se*
by
violations were enforced city,businesses are not quite as Permit packets and informs- I don't
while city officials looked at
united..Business owners may tion are ailable on the sixt
suffer," h
put an A-frame sign out.on the floor of CityHall 1055 S.Grady
see
ways
nobody
to regulate the signs. sidewalk or on landscaping next Way, or on the Internet at
police
seE
It's been a long, arduous to their buildings. www.ci.renton.wa.us.
Aston is
process,
hie
said Paul Baker,a cityHowever,non-downtown busi- "We're trying to make it as
family is
land-use compliance inspector nesses also must leave 4 feet of easy as possible,"Baker said: his
week vacs
who worked on developing the ,unobstructed space on sidewalks. The City Council will review
ordinance. No signs can be placed on grass or the new regulation in one year.who is a se
had ask(
McMr I R W . V - •` a W mm oz
Erickson i
yi/5
r
fi
s
3 >
z a 1c Tx o
A o M for the
y oc-r x .ir f.t '4 :M ,,,Y,t~ z - awA rVce""t" i F %
i e i ' although I
w „ r h` t 4
c _ rfAzr
t }Z S a 7YvQk '" S
k 44194n"`4'ge"vacation 1
1
CITF RENTON
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
Jesse Tanner,MayorGregg Zimmerman.P.E.,Administrator
February 29, 2000
TO:Parties of Record
SUBJECT: A-Frame Sign,Code Amendments
Project No. LUA-00-005,ECF
Dear Resident: ; .
This letter is to inform you that the'comment and appeal period has ended for the Environmental•Review
Committee's (ERC)Determination of Non-Significance for the above-referenced project.
No appeals were filed on the ERC determination.'
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at(425)430-7294:
I
For the Environmental Review Committee,
lfr
Laureeri Nicolay
Project Manager
FINAI'
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055
This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer
L IOMJ
February 28,2000 Renton City Council Minutes Page 69
Council meeting of 3/06/00 for second and final reading:
Development Services:A- An ordinance was read amending Sections 4-4-070 and 4-4-100.B,C,J,K and
Frame Signs L of Chapter 4,Property Development Standards, Section 4-11-160 and 4-11-
190 of Chapter 11,Definitions, of Title IV(Development Regulations)of City
Code by permitting A-frame signs in the City of Renton. MOVED BY
KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL REFER
THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 3/06/00.
CARRIED.
NEW BUSINESS MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL REFER
Airport:Restricting Takeoffs THE SUBJECT OF A NOISE ORDINANCE AFFECTING RENTON
After 10:00 p.m.(Noise MUNICIPAL AIRPORT(SPECIFICALLY,AIRPLANE TAKEOFFS AFTER
Ordinance) 10:00 P.M.)TO THE TRANSPORTATION(AVIATION) COMMITTEE.
CARRIED.
Building: Parapet Damage at Councilman Persson expressed concern that the parapet on the building located
826 S Third St at 826 S.Third St. appears to have fallen recently. Mayor Tanner said that the
City has investigated this building before,and will do so again in response to
Mr.Persson's observation.
Utility:Water Shutoff MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER,
Regulations and Policies COUNCIL REFER THE MATTER OF CITY CODE AND CITY POLICIES
RELATED TO UTILITY SHUTOFFS ON DELINQUENT WATER BILLS
TO THE UTILITIES COMMITTEE. CARRIED.
AUDIENCE COMMENT Heidi Carlson, 806 Index Ct.NE,Renton, 98056,expressed appreciation for the
Citizen Comment: Carlson— new public garbage cans installed in the Highlands area, and reported that they
New Public Garbage Cans in are being used.
the Highlands
ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CLAWSON,COUNCIL
ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 8:21 p.m.
MARILYN J.PETERSEN,CMC,City Clerk
Recorder: Brenda Fritsvold
February 28,2000
401-00-a/5
CITY OF RENTON
Planning/Building/Public Works
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 28, 2000
TO: Planning and Development Committee
FROM: Laur en Nicolay, x7294 fall,
SUBJECT: A-Fr me Sign Ordinance—First Reading
The A-Frame Sign Ordinance is scheduled for 1st reading this evening. Code Enforcement
Officer Paul Baker and I have reviewed the final draft and we believe it addresses all of your
recommendations and concerns. Please let me know if you would like any changes prior to the
2' and final reading on March 6th. Thank you.
oo-, (yello)
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 10, 2000
TO: Larry Warren, City Attorney
FROM: Laureen Nicolay, Development Services Division
SUBJECT Preparation of Ordinance Permitting A-Frame Signs
and "Hold Harmless" Form for A-Frame Sign Permit
Applicants to Sign
Larry, attached is a flop pyppy disk with the draft A-Frame Sign regulations for
preparation into Ordinance Form.
In conjunction with adoption of the new regulations permitting A-Frames Signs
on public right of way, please also prepare a "hold harmless agreement" for
applicant's to submit with their sign permit applications.
Thank you. .
II
G;DMSION.. <' >>_'' ' »» >< <» <» > » '`« >>»>>'>:.............................'CIJRRENT'PtA 1 11N .. . . .. .. ...
On the ll day of trao t 2000, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed
envelope containing eirc. documents. This information was sent to:
Department of Ecology KC Dept.of Development& Environmental Services
KC Wastewater Treatment Division City of Kent
Washington Department of F`sheries City of Newcastle
Department of Natural Resoyrces •Lincoln Property Company
WA Department of Transportation Seattle Public Utilities
Duwamish Indian Tribe
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe
Puget Sound Energy
US Army Corp.of Engineers
Signature of Sender) POJA- ..tics
STATE OF WASHINGTON
SS
COUNTY OF KING
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that signed this
instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for a uses and purposes
mentioned in the instrument.
Da -• m:. • A - _..:.h_w, 2 fyi'rt
MARILYN KAMCHEFF Notary Public and for the State of ashington
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF WASHINGTON Notary (Pr ,RILYN KAMCHEFF
COMMISSION F_XPIRE,S ' My appoin iPQ IN EXPIRES:6-29-03
JUNE 29,2003,- -i
Project Name: R _ Nau Sx9 n airnuiva 'AZ
Project Number:
LUA 00.00S , EL
NOTARYI.DOC
7* CITY 'IF=RENTON
ealLcam. Planning/Building/Public Works Department
Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
February 10, 2000
Washington State
Department of Ecology
Environmental Review Section
PO Box 47703
Olympia,WA 98504-7703
Subject: Environmental Determinations
Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following project reviewed by the
Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on (ERC date):
DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE
A-FRAME SIGN CODE AMENDMENTS
LUA-00-005,ECF
Current City sign regulations prohibit portable, off-premise signs and most signage on public right-of-way(except
for real estate directional signs). A-Frame signs are also referred to as"sandwich board"signs. The City is
proposing to change the regulations to permit portable A-Frame signs in commercial and industrial zones
Citywide and rescind the existing moratorium on portable sign code enforcement. If adopted, the new regulations
and associated housekeeping amendments would permit A-Frame signs Citywide subject to certain size and
location standards provided a one-time permit was obtained for each sign. Location: Citywide.
Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM, February 28, 2000. Appeals
must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055
South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section
4-8-11 B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-
430-6510.
If you have questions, please call me at (425)430-7294.
For the Environmental Review committee,
76,
Laureen Nicolay
Project Manager
cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Division
Larry Fisher, Department of Fisheries
David F. Dietzman, Department of Natural Resources
Don Hurter, Department of Transportation
Eric Swenson, Seattle Public Utilities
Duwamish Tribal Office
Rod Malcom, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (Ordinance)
Joe Jainga, Puget Sound Energy
agencyltr\
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055
This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer
di CITY F RENTON
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
February 10, 2000
TO:Parties of Record
SUBJECT: A-Frame Sign Code Amendments
Project No. LUA-00-005,ECF
Dear Resident:
This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) and is to inform you that
they have completed their review of the environmental impacts of the above-referenced project.. The
Committee, on February 8, 2000, decided that the subject project will be issued a Determination of Non-
Significance (DNS).
The City of Renton ERC has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on
the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) is.not required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c).
This decision was made by the ERC under the authority of Section 4-6-6, Renton Municipal Code, after
review of a completed environmental checklist and other information, on file with the lead agency. This
information is available to the public on request.
Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM, February 28,
2000. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing
Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are
governed by City of Re j ton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11 B. Additional information regarding.the appeal
process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510.
If you have any questions or desire clarification of the above, please call me at(425)430-7294.
For the Environmental Review Committee,
6 /7./
V
4V
Laureen Nicolay
Project Manager
rinsltr
1055 South Grady Way-Renton, Washington 98055
This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer
Ms. Debbie Wicks Ms. Beverly Franklin Ms. Heidi Carlson
2508 Kennewick Place NE 210 Wells Avenue South 806 Index Court NE
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98056
Mr. Phillip Beckley Ms. Alice Maxwell Mr. Doug Cartwright
655 Ferndale Court NE 6646 — 114th Avenue SE 3815 NE 4th#C-60
Renton, WA 98056 Bellevue, WA 98006 Renton, WA 98057
Mr. Lee Ford Mr. Sam Pace Mr. Al Gould
372 Stevens Avenue NW 3905— 154th Avenue SE 14021 SE 136th Street
Renton, WA 98055 Bellevue, WA 98006 Renton, WA 98059
Mr. Fred Pierson Ms. Marge Richter Mr. Dominic Gatto
C/o GFC Signs 300 Meadow Avenue North 1425 South Puget Drive
253A Rainier Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055
Renton, WA 98055
Mr. Bruce Anderson
Park Avenue Antique
101 Park Avenue North
Renton, WA 98055
PORLABEU
CITY OF RENTON
DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE
APPLICATION NUMBER: LUA-00-005,ECF
APPLICANT: City of Renton/Development Services
PROJECT NAME: A-Frame Sign Code Amendments
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL Current City sign regulations prohibit portable, off-premise signs and most
signage on public right-of-way (except for real estate directional signs). A-Frame signs are also referred to as "sandwich
board" signs. The City is proposing to change the regulations to permit portable A-Frame signs in commercial and
industrial zones Citywide and rescind the existing moratorium on portable sign code enforcement. If adopted, the new
regulations and associated housekeeping amendments would permit A-Frame signs Citywide subject to certain size and
location standards provided a one-time permit was obtained for each sign.
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: City Wide
LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton
Department of Planning/Building/Public Works
Development Planning Section
This Determination of Non-Significance is issued under WAC 197-11-340. Because other agencies of jurisdiction may be
involved, the lead agency will not act on this proposal for fourteen (14)days.
Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM, February 28, 2000. Appeals
must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055
South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section
4-8-11 B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-
430-6510.
PUBLICATION DATE: February 14, 2000
DATE OF DECISION:February 8, 2000
SIGNATURES:
k1`lGregZiMan,Ad ninistrator D TE
De artmen of Planning/Building/Pu 'c Works
im Shepherd, A in' rator DA 7
Comjnunity Services Department
Lee Wheeler, Fire Chief D E
Renton Fire Department
signature
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
Charlotte Ann Kassens first duly sworn on oath states that he/she is the Legal Clerk of the
SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION
600 S. Washington Avenue,Kent, Washington 98032 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE '`
a daily newspaper published seven (7)times a week. Said newspaper is a legal I RENTON,WASHINGTON
The-Environmental-Review-Committee
newspaper_of-general-publication-and-is-now-and-has-been-formore than six months
I, (
ERC)has issued a Determination of Non-
prior to the date of publication, referred to, printed and published in the English language I Significance forthe following project under • ,
continually as a daily newspaper in Kent, King County, Washington. The South County the authority of the Renton Municipal
Journal has been approved as a legal newspaper b i
order of the Superior Court of the A-FRAME SIGN CODE AMENDMENTSpP9YP
State of Washington for King County. LUA-00-005,ECF
Environmental review for proposal to I
The notice in the exact form attached, was published in the South County I change regulations to permit portable A-I
Journal (and not in supplemental form)which was regularly distributed to the subscribers I frame signs in commercial and industrial
during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a
zones citywide and rescind existing mora- . .
torium on portable sign code enforcement.
Appeals of the environmental determina-
A-Freame Sign Code Amendment tion must be filed in.writing on or before .
5:00 PM February 28,2000.Appeals must' ,
be filed,in writing together with the required.
as published on: 2/14/00 I $75.00 application fee with: Hearing '
Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 Southls
The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of$40.25, tor the Examiner
Renton,
o a governeded by805. ACtyaof
charged to Acct. No. 8051067. Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11B.;
Additional information regarding the appeal
ess may o Renton
Legal Number 7201 i Cityproc Clerk's Officebe ,(425)-
obtained430fr-m6510.the
Published in the South County Journal!
i February 14,2000.7201
Legal Clerk, Sout C un ournal
Subscribed and sworn before me on this aaA4ay of (---4A a , , 2000
OCpQQQQQQCOPviopp
o,... : ‘•`'
0— Notary Public of the State of Washington
residing in RentonF'Lly `o KingCounty, Washington.F Y 9
ss rT..p26 oo .caBoa
NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
RENTON, WASHINGTON
The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has issued a Determination of Non-Significance for the
following project under the authority of the Renton Municipal Code.
A-FRAME SIGN CODE AMENDMENTS
LUA-00-005,ECF
Environmental rrview for proposal to change regulations to permit portable A-Frame
signs in commercial and industrial zones citywide and rescind existing moratorium on
portable sign code enforcement.
Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM, February 28,
2000. Appeals must bel filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing
Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are
governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11 B. Additional information regarding the appeal
process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510.
Publication Date:February 14,2000
Account No. 51067
9/q/9
it
I I
III
I
dnspub
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION
PROJECT NAME: A-FRAME SIGN CODE AMENDMENTS
PROJECT NUMBER: LUA-00-005,ECF
Current City sign regulations prohibit portable,off-premise signs and most signage on public right-of-wayexceptforrealestatedirectionalsigns).A-Frame signs are also referred to as'sandwich board'signs.The City is proposing to change the regulations to permit portable A-Frame signs in commercial andIndustrialzonesCitywideandrescindtheexistingmoratoriumonportablesigncodeenforcementIfadopted,the new regulations and associated housekeeping amendments would permit A-Frame signsCitywidesubjecttocertainsizeandlocationstandardsprovidedaone-time permit was obtained for eachsign.Location:Citywide.
THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINEDTHATTHEPROPOSEDACTIONDOESNOTHAVEASIGNIFICANTADVERSEIMPACTONTHEENVIRONMENT.
Appeals of the onvironmental determination must be filed In writing on or before 5:00 PM,February 28,2000.Appeals must be Bled In writing together with the required 575.00 application fee with:Hearing Examiner,City ofRenton,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner aro governed by City of RentonMunicipalCodeSection4-8.11e.Additional Information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from theIRentonCityClerk's Office,(425)-430.5510.
it
it
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION,PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON,DEVELOPMENTSERVICESDIVISION30-7200.DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION
Please Include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file Identification.
CERTIFICATION
I, PALA . 34Z- ti, hereby certify that copies of the above
document were posted by me in. 3 conspicuous places on or nearby
the described property on . a—l(—Q00c)
Signed:
ATTEST: Subcribed and sworn before me,a Nortary Public,in and for the State of
Washington residing in ,¢11,A-on the ( Q 1" -day of , 4o j ,
MARILYN KAMCHEFF l
NOTARY PUBLIC
4 1D1 STATE OF WASHINGTON
COMMISSION EXPIRES
JUNE 29, 2003 •
MARILYN KAMCHEFF
MY APPOt ENT EXPIRES:6-29-03
Y
STAFF City of Renton
REPORT Department of Planning/Building/Public Works
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
A. BACKGROUND
ERC MEETING DATE:February 8, 2000
Project Name: A-Frame Sign Code Amendments
Applicant: City of Renton/Development Services
File Number: LUA-00-005,ECF.
Project Manager:Laureen Nicolay
Project Description: Current City sign regulations prohibit portable, off-premise signs and most
signage on public right-of-ways (except for real estate directional signs).
A-Frame signs are also referred to as"sandwich board"signs. The City is
proposing to change the regulations to permit portable A-Frame signs in
commercial and Industrial zones citywide and rescind the existing moratorium on
portable sign code enforcement. If adopted, the new regulations and associated
housekeeping amendments would permit A-Frame signs citywide subject to
certain size and location standards, provided a one-time permit was obtained for
each sign.
Project Location:City Wide
Exist. Bldg. Area gsf N/A Proposed New Bldg. Area N/A
Site Area N/A Total Building Area gsf N/A
RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a
Determination of Non-Significance (DNS).
B. RECOMMENDATION,
Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible
Officials make the following Environmental Determination:
DETERMINATION OF DETERMINATION OF
NON-SIGNIFICANCE NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED.
XX Issue DNS with 14 day Appeal Period.Issue DNS-M with 14 day Appeal Period.
Issue DNS-M with 15 day Comment Period
followed by a 14 day Appeal Period.
ERCREPT
City ofRenton P/B/PW De artmen 1P
A-FRAME SIGN CODE AMENDMENTS LUA-1
February 8,2000
C. MITIGATION MEASURES
No mitigation measures are proposed.
D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
In compliance with RCW 43.21 C. 240, the following project environmental review addresses
only those project mpacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development
standards and environmental regulations.
No environmental impacts are identified.
E.COMMENTS OF REVIEWING DEPARTMENTS
The proposal has been circulated to City Departmental/Divisional Reviewers for their review. Wht
applicable, these comments have been incorporated into the text of this report as Mitigation MeasL
and/or Notes to Applicant.
X Copies of a I Review Comments are contained in the Official File.
Copies of all Review Comments are attached to this report.
Environmental Determination Appeal Process Appeals of the environmental determination must
filed in writing on or before 500 PM, February 28, 2000. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the
required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton,\
98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11 B. Additic
information regarding the ap•eal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-
6510.
ERCREPT
I
DRAFT ORDINANCE
PERMITTING A-FRAME SIGNS
Additions indicated with underline and omissions by strike outs)
4-11-190S DEFINITIONS:
SIGN, TEMPORARY: Any sign, banner, pennant, valance or advertising display
constructed of cloth, canvas, light fabric, cardboard, wallboard or other light
materials, with or Lvithout frames, intended to be displayed for a limited period of
time only. (Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983; Amd. Ord. 4577, 1-22-1996)
SIGN, PORTABLE: A sign which is not permanently affixed and designed for or
capable of move gent, except for.those.signs explicitly designed for people to
carry on their perons or which are permanently affixed to motor vehicles. (Ord.
3719, 4-11-1983; krild. Ord. 4577, 1-22-1996)
Sign, A-Frame: A non-illuminated type of portable sign comprised of
hinged panels configured in the shape of the alphabetic letter "A". These
signs coritact the ground but not are not anchored to the ground and are
independent of any other structure.
4-4-100C PROHIBITED SIGNS
4-4-10005. Porta le Signs: Portable signs or any sign whiet is not permanently
mounted, except for those signs specifically permitted by Section 4-4-100J.
4-4-100C9. Signs on Public Right-of-Way: Signs on public right-of-way other
than temporary and portable signs allowed by subsection J of this Section,
temporary-signs, City sponsored signs, and public service signs per subsections
B6b, B6c and B6m of this Section. (Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983)
4-4-100C10. Off-Premises Signs: Except:
a. Temporary and portable signs allowed by subsection J of this Section, City
sponsored signs, and public service signs per subsections B6b, B6c and B6m
of this Section. (Ord. 4172, 9-12-1988; Amd. Ord. 4629, 8-19-1996)
The following code section is unclear and is proposed for deletion due the
ambiguity of the v),ording.
b:-Off-prefnise&-advert+sing--may-be-allowed-as--art-accessory-use--of-an
identification-sign-ar---otiaer---structure--if--the-following-conditions--are--met
i. The Maxim
ii. No-more-than-twenty--five-percent--(2.5°/0)-of-the--principal--structure--is
covered bpi the off premises advertising sign
iii. The off premises advertising sign is designed to be viewed by users of
the.faoility-father-than-street--traffic--(Ord,-4-1-72, 9424988)
Rename Section 4-4-100J from "Temporary Signs" to "Temporary and
Portable Signs". Add new Section! 4-4-100J5 as follows, retain and
renumber existing Section 4-4-100J5 and J6.
5. A-Frame Signs: A-frame signs complying with all the following standards
may be permitted:
Number:
Within City Center Skin Regulation Area: Only one of these
signs is permitted per business per street frontage.
Elsewhere in the City: One of these signs is permitted per
business per street frontage and, in addition, an additional sign
is permitted to be located abutting the business and building to
which the sign relates.
ii. Location Requirements:
Permitted Location:
Within City Center Sian Regulation Area: A-frame signs
must be placed against the building and business to
which the sign relates.
Elsewhere in the City: A-frame signs may be located on
the public sidewalk abutting the business site and/or
within the landscaping area on or abutting the
business site, however. A-frame signs can not be
placed in the landscape strip between the curb and
outer edge of the public sidewalk. Additionally, for
businesses located within shopping centers, an
additional A-Frame sign may be placed against the
building and business to which the sign relates.
Pedestrian Clearance: A minimum of 4' of unobstructed
sidewalk area between the outer edge of the sign and the street
curb is required.
Clear Vision Area: No sign shall be located as to pose a
danger and violate the clear vision area specified in Section 4-4-
10006, Prohibited Signs. Where a traffic vision hazard is
created, the City may require a modification to the height or
location of a sign to the degree necessary to eliminate the
hazard.
iii. Size: Signs shall be no larger than 32" wide and 36" tall.
iv. Construction Specifications and Materials: The sign must be
professionally manufactured of durable material(s). No
lighting or attachments, such as balloons are permitted.
v. Maintenance and Appearance: Signs must be maintained in
accordance with the provisions of Section 4-4-100D3, "Sign
Maintenance Required". and Section 4-4-100D4,
Appearance of Signs".
2
i
vi. Alteration of Landscaping Prohibited: No landscaping may be
damaged or modified to accommodate an A-frame sign. The
City may require replacement of any damaged landscaping
pursuant to RMC Section 4-4-100-0701, Damaged
Landscaping.
vii. Removal upon Close of Business Required: A-frame signs shall
not be displayed during non-business hours.
viii. Display of Permit and Code Requirements: Any business
displaying an A-frame sign shall have a copy of the sign
permit for the sign posted along with its City business
license. Additionally the business shall post the City's
regulations governing A-frame signs so that employees are
made aware of the standards.
ix. Dis la of Permit Number: All A-frame si ns shall have the si n
permit number a minimum of one half inch in height placed
on the exterior sign face in the upper left-hand corner by the
permittee.
x. Proof of Insurance and Hold Harmless Agreement for Signs on
Public Right of Way: In order to obtain a sign permit,
applicants must provide the Development Services Division
with proof of general commercial liability insurance
Certificate of Liability Insurance) meeting c;ie requirements
of Section 4-4-100L4. The sign permit application must also
include a signed hold harmless agreement that specifies that
the owner of the sign will defend, indemnify, and hold the
City harmless for any loss, injuries, damage, claims or
lawsuit, including attorney's fees that arise from the sign.
xi. Confiscation of Signs: Signs that do not comply with the provisions
of this Section may be confiscated by the City pursuant to
Section 4-4-100T, Violations and Penalties.
No major code changes, other than broadening the scope of the authority section
to allow enforcement by the Development Services Division's Code Enforcement
Officers, are necessary to ensure A-Frame enforcement and maintenance since
existing Section 4;4-100B currently states:
4-4-100B3 Periodic Inspection of Signs: All signs controlled by this
Section shall be subject to inspection and periodic reinspection by the
Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator. (Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983)
4-4-100B4 Authority of Planning/Building/Public Works
Administrtor: The Building-Official--Planning/Building/Public Works
Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to enforce all the
provisions of this Section. The Building--0-ffic+at--Planning/Building/Public
Works Administrator may order the removal of any sign that is not
maintained in accordance with the provisions of subsection D3 of this
Section. (Ord. 2877, 9-9-1974, Amd. Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983)
Rename Section 4-4-100L to "Location, Permit, and /Insurance Requirements for
Signs Projecting into Setbacks or Right of Way".
4-4-100L4: Liability Insurance and--Annual-Permit-Required for Signs
Located On or Over Public Property:
a. Excluding wall signs projecting twelve inches (12") or less over a public right-
of-way, the owner of any sign projecting located on or over a public right-of-way
shall at the time of sign permit application, file with the Building Official a
Certificate of public Lliability+Insurance.policy-issued by an insurance company
authorized to do business in the State of Washington_;--appropriately--conditioned
in--confor ity-with-the--provisions-of-this-Section;-witf}-Limits-of-©ne-hundred
lis--liability
insurance--and--fifty-thousand--dollars--($50;000)-property-damage-coverage. _The
City shall be named as an additional insured, and notified of lapses or changes to
the insurance policy in advance of such change. The insurance shall be in the
amount of$1,000,000per occurrence.
4-4-100L4b5 (New Section):: Annual Right of Way Use Permit Required for
Signs ProiectinQOn or Over Public Right of Way: An annual right of way use
sign permit shall be required for any signs projecting over the right-of-way,
excluding wall signs projecting twelve inches (12") or less. Annual fees shall be
consistent with RMC 4-1-140ME. The annual permit shall be issued upon a
determination that liability insurance remains in effect, and that the sign and
supporting structure are secure. (Ord. 4720, 5-4-1998)
SIGN PERMIT FEES: No changes necessary since Ordinance#4817 recently
established fees for A-Frame Signs at $100.00 for the first sign and $50.00 for
each additional sign.
Other related sign regulation housekeeping amendments: Delete the
following Sections and portions of sections which are contradictory and/or
confusing when considered with our prohibitions against portable and off-premise
signage.
4-4-110-k9. Nonstructural Trim: Nonstructural trim
sur#accs may be of wood, metal, approved plastics or any combination thereof.
4-1-4-1-60: Portable-Display--Surface: A-di-splay--curtace--temporarily--affixed--to--a
standardized-advertising structure which is regularly moved from structure to
structure-at-per+odic--inter-vals-:--(Qr•d-:--371.3;--4-1--1-1.983;--Arnd:--Or-d-45-77;--4-2-4-996)
4
Related landscaping regulation housekeeping amendments: Insert the
following new Section 4-4-100-0701 and retain and renumber the existing Section
4-4-100-0701 to 4;4-100-070J.
I. DAMAGED LANSDSCAPING: Any landscaping required by City regulations,
which is damaged must, at the request of the City, be replaced with like or better
landscaping as d-termined by the Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Administrator.
Draft A-Frame Ordinance
5
SIGN CODE AMENDMENT PROPOSAL SUMMARY:
Existing Sign Code Provisions: Current City sign regulations prohibit portable, off-
premise signs and most signage on public right of way City-wide (except for real estate
directional signs).
Proposal to Allow A-Frame Signs: The sign code amendment proposal would change
the City's regulations to permit portable A-frame signs in commercial and industrial
zones and rescind the existing moratorium on the portable sign code enforcement. A-
frame signs are also referred to as "sandwich board" signs. Once adopted, the new
regulations would permit A-frame signs subject to certain size and location standards
provided a one-time permit was obtained for each sign. The Council determined that A-
frame signs should be allowed City-wide, after giving consideration to only permitting
them in the City Center Sign Regulation Area.
SIGN CODE AMENDMENT PROPOSAL DETAILS:
History and Enforcement Moratorium: Council originally referred the issue of A-frame
signage to Planning and Development Committee after the issue was raised at a Council
meeting in April of 1998. In May of last year, the Council passed Resolution#3327,
prohibiting enforcement of the A-frame sign restrictions pending further study of the
issue.
Review Team Formed: At Council request, the Development Services Division formed
a twelve member sign code review team comprised of local business owners (including
a sign company) and interested citizens to review the issue of portable A-frame signage.
The Sign Code Review Team met numerous times, reviewed sign regulations from other
jurisdictions, and inspected the existing A-frame signs within the downtown area. The
Review Team did not achieve full consensus on all issues, but the majority of members
concurred with the recommendations attached as Exhibit A.
Public Hearing: A public hearing to take testimony on the issue was held on
September 27, 1999.
Planning and Development Committee Recommendations: The Planning and
Development Committee recommended and the Council concurred that regulations
permitting A-frame signs be adopted subject to the following:
Size of signs: The draft code allows signs to be a maximum of 32"wide by 36" tall. A
maximum sign size was proposed in lieu of a standardized sign size in order to allow for
specific site conditions. For example, if only 32"wide by 36"tall signs were permitted, a
business building abutting a 6-foot wide sidewalk would not be able to put up any A-
frame signage since such a wide sign would project into the required 4-foot clear
pedestrian area.
Number of Signs: The draft code allows each business one A-frame sign per street
frontage. In addition, businesses outside of the City Center Sign Regulation Area are
also allowed one additional A-frame sign abutting the business building to which the sign
relates.
1
i
The following example illustrates the number of signs that the new regulations would
permit in the case of a shopping center: The center on the corner of Rainier Avenue
South and Airport Way contains six businesses and at least twb street frontages. In this
case, each business could put an A-frame sign on Rainier Avenue and Airport Way. In
addition, each of these businesses could put a sign immediately abutting its individual
business space, rekulting in a total of 18 A-frame signs on or abutting the shopping
center property.
Pedestrian Safety and Sign Location: Sidewalk widths in the downtown vary from 8 to
eleven 11 feet in width. In other commercial areas of the City, sidewalks are typically 5
feet in width. The sign code amendments to permit portable signs include the following
provisions to reduc the potential for pedestrian passage impacts:
Location: Sig s must be placed against the building and business to which the sign
relates in the D wntown Sign Regulation Area. Outside the Downtown Sign
Regulation Are , signs will be permitted to be located in (or partially within) a
landscaping strip--as well as on the public sidewalk and adjacent to the business
building.. The daft code prohibits alteration of existing landscaping in order to install
a sign.
Pedestrian Clearance: A minimum of 4' of unobstructed sidewalk area is required
to place a sign.
Clear Vision Area: Any regulations adopted should ensure that driver visibility is not
impaired near intersections,.including private driveways.
Construction Spei ifications and Materials: The materials used to construct the signs
must be durable.
Removal of Signs Upon Closure in Evenings/Weekends: The draft code includes a
requirement that these signs be removed in the evenings and/or weekends a business is
closed.
Insurance Requirements/City Liability: The current code requires an annual sign
permit for signs over public right-of-way and proof of insurance with the City of Renton
named as an additi nal insured. Minor wording amendments proposed in the draft code
will clarify that insu ance is also required for signs on the public right of way. A one-time
permit, rather than 6n annual permit, however, will be required for A-frame signs.
Sign Maintenance The current sign code has provisions requiring the maintenance of
signs. The following language is already in the sign code:
Sign Maintenance Required: All signs, together with all of their supports,
braces, guy and anchors, shall be kept in repair and in proper state of
preservatior1. The surfaces of all signs shall be kept neatly painted or posted at
all times. The ground area shall be neat and orderly. (Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983)
Appearance of Signs: If a sign is visible from more than one direction, all areas
not intendect as display surfaces including the back and sides shall be designed
so that such areas are given a finished and pleasing appearance with the display
surfaces visible only from the directions that they are intended to be seen. (Ord.
2504, 9-23-1969)
2
1,771)
Administration and Fees: A $100.00 permit fee ($50.00 for each additional sign) has
already been adopted via Ordinance#4817. The sign permit number would be required
to be noted on the sign for efficiency in enforcement. The Development Services
Division's code compliance officer will be charged with enforcing the new A-frame
regulations.
Violations of Sign Code: No changes are needed to ensure compliance since the
current code already provides for removal of illegal signage by the code enforcement
officer and establishes penalties for sign code violations. The current regulations state:
Penalties: Penalties for any violation of any of the provisions of this Chapter
shall be in accord with RMC 1-3-2, Civil Penalties. (Ord. 4351, 5-4-1992) (This
Section allows fines of$100.00 to$500.00 dollars per day depending on the
length of time the violation continues]
Removal and Storage of Illegal Signs Authorized: Unauthorized signs or other
advertising devices either wholly or partially supported on or projecting over the
public right-of-way may be removed by the Building Official or his representative
without notice to the owner. Such signs or devices shall be stored at the City
garage for a period not to exceed thirty (30) days, during which time the owner
may redeem such sign or device by payment to the City Treasurer an amount
equal to the City cost for the removal and storage, but in no event shall the fee
be less than twenty dollars ($20.00). After expiration of the thirty (30) day storage
period, the sign not having been redeemed, it shall be destroyed or otherwise
disposed of. (Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983, Amd. Ord. 4422, 10-25-1993)
Confiscated Signs: All confiscated signs shall become the property of the City.
Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983)
CONCLUSION:
The Council concluded that the proposed regulations would permit more effective
advertising without substantially compromising pedestrian mobility and safety. Sign
maintenance requirements will ensure they remain attractive during the one-year trial
period.
One-Year Review: The Council will reconsider the new regulations after a one-year
period to ensure the regulations are functioning as intended. Development Services
staff will track the one year time period and prepare a report including the number of sign
code violations and administration time for presentation to the Council at that time.
Moratorium lifted: The existing moratorium on enforcement of the sign code
Resolution#3327) will be rescinded in conjunction with the adoption of the new
regulations.
Attachment: Exhibit A: Sign Code Review Team Recommendations
3
Exhibit A
REVIEW TEAM RECOMMENDATIONS
The Team did not achieve full consensus on all issues, but the majority of members
concurred with the¶ollowing changes to the sign code:
Allow in Downtown Only: With the exception of one Team member, a strong advocate
of continued prohibitions against"A-frame" signage due to safety and accessibility
concerns, the majorlity of the team members concurred to recommend that A-Frame
signs be permitted only in the downtown sign regulation area and only abutting the
business to which the sign relates. The Team felt that permitting A-Frame signs in the
downtown area wa warranted due to the pedestrian nature of the area, the City's
emphasis on downt wn investment, and the unique concentration of retail businesses in
that area.
City Center Sign Regulation Area
f:7.q. .. ., n'f,:ri %`tJ:'3'!:_..v:r•y.::.o-1:e.:ss-^ram . :;:r_.r.Y«..ns7i-»`.r.-mtiaa>..a.-. ..-..,.. ..... ,.;.-..,...._.._i
I 5.rrs[ •'r' ' ,^Z=,—tail.Y 7N Sti:
misid -- I
KF
1IIi
nth k1= 13c:k111JI
IFr-
i
P
1 A
1"hig,z,S a.it t
1 •MI. t
y
LIE ,7:7H I I 1 I - Man
i
7 ,ate='+ — ='"__ —
A
i '
YYYI
muI! ! O
t sue, —
rr
1— TA
l_ Page 1 "of 21=1.7_7- =_- ____ I''S/
7()/ 1_sz_—__,,-Ti= __ , ill,
II
Team Recommended Number, Size, and Location of A-Frame Signs: The majority.
of team members also concurred to recommend that Council permit only standardized
signs of a certain size limited to one per business per street frontage. The Team wished
to ensure that only sturdy, attractive, wind resistant and professionally produced signs
would be permitted. The specific recommendations of the majority of the Review Team
were as follows:
Number: Only one of these signs should be permitted per business per street
frontage.
Size: The sign must be exactly 32"wide and 36" tall.
Pedestrian Safety and Accessibility Issues: Sidewalk widths in the downtown vary
from 8 to eleven 11 feet in width. In other commercial areas of the City, sidewalks are
typically 5 feet in width. Any sign code amendments to permit portable signs should
include the following provisions to reduce the potential for pedestrian passage impacts:
Location: Signs must be placed against the building and business to which the sign
relates.
Pedestrian Clearance: A minimum of 4' of unobstructed sidewalk area between the
outer edge of the sign and the street curb is required.
Clear Vision Area: Any regulations adopted should ensure that driver visibility is not
impaired near intersections, including private driveways.
Insurance Requirements/City Liability: The Team concurred that insurance should be
required for signs on public right-of-way.
Sign Maintenance: The Team wanted to ensure that A-Frame signs were properly
maintained. No changes are needed to ensure maintenance since: he current sign code
has provisions requiring the maintenance of signs.
Administration: If the Council decides to permit A-Frame signs, the Team, with
concurrence by City sign code enforcement staff, recommended that a sign permit be
required for each A-Frame sign ($100.00 fee). Also the permit number would be
required to be noted on the sign for efficiency in enforcement. The review team
recommended that the Council reconsider the new regulations again after a one-year
period. Development Services staff would track the one year time period and prepare a
report including the number of sign code violations and administration time for
presentation to the Council at that time.
Violations of Sign Code: The Review Team expressed concern that any new
regulations be effectively enforced. No changes are needed to ensure compliance since
the current code already provides for removal of illegal signage by the code enforcement
officer and establishes penalties for sign code violations. However, additional staff time
will be required to administer(plan review, permit issuance, explaining provisions, etc.)
and enforce the sign code should the Council determine to permit A-Frame signs.
Page 2 of 2
C'ty of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public works
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: p g COMMENTS DUE: FEBRUARY 2, 2000
APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-005,E0IF DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 20,2000
APPLICANT: City of Renton/Development Services PROJECT MANAGER: Laureen Nicolay
PROJECT TITLE: A-Frame Sign Regulation Amendment WORK ORDER NO: 78639
LOCATION: City Wide
SITE AREA: N/A I BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Curreht City sign regulations prohibit portable,off-premise signs and most signage on public right-of-
way(except for real estate directional signs). A-Frame signs are also referred to as"sandwich board"signs. The City is proposing to
change the regulations to permit portable A-Frame signs in commercial and industrial zones Citywide and rescind the existing
moratorium on portable sign code enforcement. If adopted,the new regulations and associated housekeeping amendments would
permit A-Frame signs subject to certain size and location standards provided a one-time permit was obtained for each sign.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code)COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth Housing
Air Aesthetics
Water Light/Glare
Plants Recreation
Land/Shoreline Use Utilities
Animals Transportation
Environmental Health Public Services
Energy/Historic/Cultural
Natural Resources Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
V 7 4 f'
14,000 Feet'
n ///
i
B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS
Mtn c Ac, r
cts , Goo/ /y-
C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS
AO 7ZI/9/6 ,
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or
areas where additional inf ation is nee ed to properly assess this proposal.
c1/ '7
ig ture of Direc r or Authorized Representative Date
Routing Rev.10/93
I of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public.Works
ENVIRONMEN A' 1 -DZW—EL T APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 1:6U_L:e COMMENTS DUE: FEBRUARY 2, 2000
APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-005,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 20,2000
APPLICANT: City of Renton/Develo ment Services PROJECT MANAGER: Laureen Nicolay
PROJECT TITLE: A-Frame Sign Re ulation Amendment WORK ORDER NO: 78639
LOCATION: City Wide
SITE AREA: N/A I BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Current City sign regulations prohibit portable,off-premise signs and most signage on public right-of-
way(except for real estate directional signs). A-Frame signs are also referred to as"sandwich board"signs. The City is proposing to
change the regulations to permit portable A-Frame signs in commercial and industrial zones Citywide and rescind the existing
moratorium on portable sign code enforcement. If adopted,the new regulations and associated housekeeping.amendments would
permit A-Frame signs subject to certain size and location standards provided a one-time permit was obtained for each sign.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(I.g.Non-Code) COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information
impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts impacts Necessary
Earth Housing
Air Aesthetics •
Wafer Light/Glare
Plants Recreation
Land/Shoreline Use Utilities
Animals Transportation
Environmental Health Public Services
Energy/Historic/Cultural
Natural Resources Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14,000 Feet
r °- appl cab
B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS
C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or
areas where additional information is nee'ed to properly assess this proposal.
iCgeis 1-
Signature of Director orb orized Representative Date
Routing Rev.10/93
City of 1`.`..pan Department of Planning/Building/Public vvorks
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
I
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Tkt(2 eV.eI vir) COMMENTS DUE: FEBRUARY 2, 2000
I
APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-005,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 20,2000
APPLICANT: City of Renton/Development Services PROJECT MANAGER: Laureen Nicolay
PROJECT TITLE: A-Frame Sign Regulation Amendment• WORK ORDER NO: 78639DEC
r
LOCATION: City Wide JAM 2 U 24nn
SITE AREA: N/A I BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A
rr 1 ( r 1.1 l v;\ if
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Current City sign regulations prohibit portable,off-premise signs and most`si jn ge or public right-of-
way(except for real estate directional signs). A-Frame signs are also referred to as"sandwich board"signs. The City is proposing to
change the regulations to permit portable A-Frame signs in commercial and industrial zones Citywide and rescind the existing
moratorium on portable sign code eiforcement. If adopted,the new regulations and associated housekeeping amendments would
permit A-Frame signs subject to certain size and location standards provided a one-time permit was obtained for each sign.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ie.g.Non-Code)COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth Housing
Air Aesthetics
Water Light/Glare
Plants Recreation
Land/Shoreline Use Utilities
Animals Transportation
Environmental Health Public Services
Energy/Historic/Cultural
Natural Resources Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14,000 Feet
M
B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS
k
C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS i d
We have r viewed this applic• on with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or
areas whe e additional inform. is n eded to properly assess this proposal.
Ct'w 2b G
Sign tur of Director or Authorized R 'resentative Date
Routing Rev.10/93
1
Ci of Rt' ,i Department of Planning/Building/Public l'.-_...s
ENVIRONMENTAL& DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 'ice Re W-8T-Li COMMENTS DUE: FEBRUARY 2, 2000
APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-005,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 20,2000
APPLICANT: City of Renton/Development Services PROJECT MANAGER: Laureen N1a rOF RENTON
PROJECT TITLE: A-Frame Sign Recillation Amendment WORK ORDER NO: 78639
LOCATION: City Wide JAN Z 4 Z000 ..
SITE AREA: N/A I BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A
t.iWiG DIVISIONSUMMARYOFPROPOSAL: Currenit City sign regulations prohibit portable,off-premise signs and most signage on public right-of-
way(except for real estate directional signs). A-Frame signs are also referred to as"sandwich board"signs. The City is proposing to
change the regulations to permit portable A-Frame signs in commercial and industrial zones Citywide and rescind the existing
moratorium on portable sign code enfbrcement. If adopted,the new regulations and associated housekeeping amendments would
permit A-Frame signs subject to certain size and location standards provided a one-time permit was obtained for each sign.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code) COMMENTS
1
Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth Housing
Air Aesthetics
Water Light/Glare
Plants Recreation
Land/Shoreline Use Utilities
Animals Transportation
Environmental Health Public Services
Energy/Historic/Cultural
Natural Resources Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14,000 Feet
li
B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS
C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS
IVO UMW-Cal .
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or
areas where addifonalinfPrmation is need'd to properly assess this proposal.
e v,/,0
Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date
Routing Rev.10/93
7
ity of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public;works
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: CL ln_l_c_l.o_ S-e'VlCtJ3 COMMENTS DUE: FEBRUARY 2, 2000
APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-005,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 20,2000
APPLICANT: City of Renton/Develgpment Services PROJECT MANAGER: Laureen NicolayMY OF I:Imr
PROJECT TITLE: A-Frame Sign Regulation Amendment WORK ORDER NO: 78639
LOCATION: City Wide J N 2 0 2000
SITE AREA: N/A BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A
OLALLItilii(Li 11.reif'610
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Current City sign regulations prohibit portable,off-premise signs and most signage on public right-of-
way(except for real estate direction'lal signs). A-Frame signs are also referred to as"sandwich board"signs. The City is proposing to
change the regulations to permit portable A-Frame signs in commercial and industrial zones Citywide and rescind the existing
moratorium on portable sign code enforcement. If adopted,the new regulations and associated housekeeping amendments would
permit A-Frame signs subject to certain size and location standards-provided a one-time permit was obtained for each sign.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code)COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth Housing
Air Aesthetics
Water Light/Glare
Plants Recreation
Land/Shoreline Use Utilities
Animals Transportation
Environmental Health Public Services
Energy/Historic/Cultural
Natural Resources Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14,000 Feet
B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS
ye_
C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or
areas whew•dditional information is needed to properly assess this proposal.
4we1natureofDiracruzReres1. Dat
Routing Rev.10/93
City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public works
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:—rmAl sp - COMMENTS DUE: FEBRUARY 2, 2000
APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-005,EGF DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 20,2000
APPLICANT: City of Renton/Development Services PROJECT MANAGER: Laureen Nicolay
PROJECT TITLE: A-Frame Sign Regulation Amendment WORK ORDER NO: 78639
C REIVTON
LOCATION: City Wide
SITE AREA: N/A I BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A JAN 2 01 2000
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Curtlent City sign regulations prohibit portable,off-premise signs and maW pgblic right-of-
way(except for real estate directior?al signs). A-Frame signs are also referred to as"sandwich board"signs. The City ig OOttet to
change the regulations to permit portable A-Frame signs in commercial and industrial zones Citywide and rescind the existing
moratorium on portable sign code enforcement. If adopted,the new regulations and associated housekeeping amendments would
permit A-Frame signs subject to ce am size and location standards provided a one-time permit was obtained for each sign.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code)COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information
impacts impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth Housing
Air Aesthetics
Water Light/Glare
Plants Recreation
Land/Shoreline Use Utilities
Animals Transportation
Environmental Health Public Services
Energy/Historic/Cultural
Natural Resources Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14,000 Feet
B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS
C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS/
i \n C-c) .r, rtl (it_Y
We have reviewed this application inth particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or
areas where additional information iineeded to properly assess this proposal.
0
p,. r. 1/,';, C.,1- i
Signature of Director or Authorized
fRI epresentative Date
Routing Rev.10/93
cy
I i
City,of iceanon Department of Planning/Building/Public vvdrks
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: S c,e__(U3(. A 0-6G-k' COMMENTS DUE: FEBRUARY 2, 2000
APPLICATION NO: LUA-00-005,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: JANUARY 20,2000
1iryOF
APPLICANT: City of Renton/Development Services PROJECT MANAGER: Laureen Nicolay 7 RED('
PROJECT TITLE: A-Frame Sign RI gulation Amendment WORK ORDER NO: 78639
LOCATION: City Wide
Ii q Zoo
SITE AREA: N/A I BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A
6`°`",
1 i't OIL/
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Current City sign regulations prohibit portable,off-premise signs and most signage on public right-of-
way(except for real estate directiorf aI signs). A-Frame signs are also referred to as"sandwich board"signs. The City is proposing to'
change the regulations to permit portable A-Frame signs in commercial and industrial zones Citywide and rescind the existing
moratorium on portable sign code enforcement. If adopted,the new regulations and associated housekeeping amendments would
permit A-Frame signs subject to ce ain size and location standards provided a one-time permit was obtained for each sign.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT I(e.g.Non-Code)COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth Housing
Air Aesthetics
Wafer Light/Glare
Plants Recreation
Land/Shoreline Use Utilities
Animals Transportation
Environmental Health Public Services
Energy/Historic/Cultural
Natural Resources Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14,000 Feet
B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS
C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or
areas where additional info(r/mation isl needed to properly assess this proposal.
Signature of Director or Authorized I epresentative Date
Routing Rev.10/93
41111)•.
C
NOTICE OF APPLICATION
AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-
SIGNIFICANCE(DNS)
ATE: January 20,2000
L1AND USE NUMBER: LUA-00-005,ECF
1PPLICATION NAME: A-FRAME SIGN REGULATION AMENDMENTS
RROJECT DESCRIPTION:Current City sign regulations prohibit portable, off-premise signs and most
s gnage on public righlaf-way(except for real estate directional signs).A-Frame signs are also referred to as'sandwich
Board'signs. The City is proposing to change the regulations to permit portable A-Frame signs in commercial and
Industrial zones Citywide and rescind the existing moratorium on portable sign code enforcement. If adopted,the new
r¢8ulations and associated housekeeping amendments would permit A-Frame signs Citywide subject to certain size and
WceOon standards provided cone-time permit was obtained for each sign.
PROJECT LOCATION: Citywide
QPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE(DNS):As the Lead Agency,the City of Renton has determined
ttt at significant environmental Impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project.Therefore,as permitted under the
RCW 43.21C.110,the City of Renton Is using the Optional DNS process to give notice that a ONS Is likely to be Issued.
Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS are integrated Into a single comment period.There wilt be no
mment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non-Significance(DNS).A 14-day appeal
fiedod will follow the Issuance of the DNS.
PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: January 18,2000
OTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: January20,2000
IemtItslReview Requested: Environmental(SEPA)Review
Qthor Permits which may be required: None
quested Studies:None
I ocatlon where application may
de reviewed:Planning/Building/Public Works Division,Development Services Department,
1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055
VUBLIC HEARING: A public hearing to discuss the issue was held before the Renton City Council on '
September 27,1999.
CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW:
nd Use: Not applicable.
nvironmental Documents that
valuate the Proposed Project: None required
L
evetopment Regulations
sed For Project Mitigation: Not applicable.
reposed Mitigation Measures: None required. Imposed
on the above application must be submitted in writing to Laureen Nicolay,Project Manager,Development
Services Division,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 980555,by 5:00 PM on February 02,2008.If you have questions
bout this proposal,er wish to be made a parry of retard and receive additional notification by mail,contact the Project
anger.Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any I
li
ecision on this project
ONTACT PERSON: LAUREEN NICOLAY(425)430.7294
I
PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN BALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION
O1ICE OF PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTALAPPUCAT10N.da I,,
CERTIFICATION
I, r4u j ` ken- hereby certify-that /d copies of the above
document wer
I
posted by me.in /0 conspicuous places on or nearby
the described p operty on .Lu A -o 6
Signed ,,.c;lal'`-°Q/(
ATTEST: Subcril ed and sworn before me,a Nortary Public,in and for the State of
Washington residing iniq D ,Q,,. L, on the '`I day o leo o
pJ' MARILYNCHEFF r
l/l NOTARY PUBLIC
i STATE OF WASHINGTONMARILYNK4MCHEFFCOMMISSIONEXPIRESMYAPPOINTMENTEXPIRES:6-29-03 IUf E 23,2003
S
o Coil a ikJ
c..v t'E / U
Sit)
106
S 3kciP-
Jr(LiA1445
4/1f'tt)
014ptid pia
ST
1^ v OY4
tita
NOTICE OF APPLICATION
AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-
SIGNIFICANCE (DNS)
DATE: January 20,2000
LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-00-005,ECF
APPLICATION NAME: A-FRAME SIGN REGULATION AMENDMENTS
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Current City sign regulations prohibit portable, off-premise signs and most
signage on public right-of-way(except for real estate directional signs). A-Frame signs are also referred to as"sandwich
board" signs. The City is proposing to change the regulations to permit portable A-Frame signs in commercial and
industrial zones Citywide and rescind the existing moratorium on portable sign code enforcement. If adopted, the new
regulations and associated housekeeping amendments would permit A-Frame signs Citywide subject to certain size and
location standards provided a one-time permit was obtained for each sign.
PROJECT LOCATION: Citywide
OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE(DNS): As the Lead Agency,the City of Renton has determined
that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore,as permitted under the
RCW 43.21 C.110,the City of Renton is using thlie Optional DNS process to give notice that a DNS is likely to be issued.
Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no
comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non-Significance(DNS). A 14-day appeal
period will follow the issuance of the DNS.J
PERMIT APPLICATION DATE:January 18,2000
NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: January 20,2000
Permits/Review Requested: Environmental(SEPA)Review
Other Permits which may be required:None
Requested Studies: None
Location where application may
be reviewed: Planning/Building/Public Works Division,Development Services Department,
1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055
1PUBLIC HEARING: A public hearing to discuss the issue was held before the Renton City Council on
September 27,1999.
CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW:
Land Use: Not applicable.
Environmental Documents that
Evaluate the Proposed Project: None required
Development Regulations
Used For Project Mitigation: Not applicable.
Proposed Mitigation Measures: None required.
Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Laureen Nicolay, Project Manager, Development
Services Division, 1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,by 5:00 PM on February 02;2000. If you have questions
about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Project
Manager.Anyone who submits written comment will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any
decision on this project.
CONTACT PERSON: LAUREEN NICOLAY (425)430-7294
LEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN GALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION
NOTICE OF PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL APPLICATION.aoc !
5::::::::<ii::;:±;:;:;ii::^iiii:iiiii:iiiX is4:i•i:•i:•i}is4iiii4i:tr:G:4:•r:•i:?F?•i:4iiii:;•i L4i}iiii?i:^i-. v :' '.P_M•ye o:. EAV."' i::ili~V I .................1....:............:................................................................
i 4U::ik+• 4.n5is?.,;:;::is 4(:4i:4::)'••:• :•{?''••:"•'''j!':L?{i:: :iJi:i<t}}5$irii:iiiY.%<j
x::...::::::::::iii:4}•:.i::i:i::.>•.:"::•:'::.rii::::::>:>:>5:::::::::ii'::'+:i:•:i:::::::i::::::{. •`:.:.>n::n:
iiii::::::iiii............:::!:)••••••••••••••••••••••:
i•:••••
i:'::::•i::::••••....,i?
i:!}•:'.:::ti4:i:!'''',.'•::.
i:..::4:... ....
i::??::G••'':.•. is:i:::.ji:::!:::r:::::i::•...''' ••••..••
fi•.
X.,+1,.<i:, iii::Y:3:n(:;.+:isiiy
litc T • N
RO•J•EO•`: '::INF •,••••••,.TIO:N•` >> >>«'>` ` •• ••
Note if::there is:more then ohe io el::;h 4:66 :;..ease'attoo.can additional::
notarized Master<Applicatiort_for eac owner ......:. ........ . _._. PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME:
NAME:
Sc&N r)PE Ame-190 5 )U P '(.'T
AJA 4— S
PROPERTY/PROJECT ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION:
ADDRESS: QL-L eats f L/pZ l/VDUS712.4A-4- ZON.E
KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S):
CITY: ZIP:
x{
DE
TELEPHONE NUMBER: EXISTING LAND USE(S): OV)ENT PLANi'JINGCITYOFRENTON
NA-
h6 1APFLLGANTi€€<thert an..a. ... ?... :..:.: :::.
NAME: 07y()
PROPOSED LAND USES:RECEIVE®
jCF,S l7lllf/CN
COMPANY(if applicable): EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION:
ADDRESS: /05 5c v/7 7 kV4Y
PROPOSED// COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable):
VP
CITY: E/(f'if-e)/ki ZIP: ggi 7g EXISTING ZONING:
WA-NDVSn&AL
ZQv 5
TELEPHONE NUMBER:
4.25 - 43o- 0 q4 PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable):
T
SITE AREA (SQ. FT. OR ACREAGE):
NAME: bet v/%>%UG`[ isto0A4y
COMPANY (if applicable):
PROJECT VALUE:
NA-
ADDRESS: IS THE SITE LOCATED IN THE AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA?
AIA
CITY: ZIP:
IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY OTHER TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY
SENSITIVEt/ AREA?
TELEPHONE NUMBER:
L A...)DES 1 3i1.;.L F;:.'E P...F:.:::...::...:.......... ......5... .Sri....:YI:....................................
A-
71t
2:;::::::
ww >sta..... . . .eke.:. ... .e..ees............................:............: .
ANNEXATION SUBDIVISION:
COMP. PLAN AMENDMENT
REZONE LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
SPECIAL PERMIT SHORT PLAT
TEMPORARY PERMIT TENTATIVE PLAT
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PRELIMINARY PLAT
SITE PLAN APPROVAL FINAL PLAT
GRADE & FILL PERMIT
NO. CU. YDS: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT:
VARIANCE
FROM SECTION:PRELIMINARY
WAIVER FINAL
WETLAND PERMIT
ROUTINE VEGETATION MOBILE HOME PARKS:
MANAGEMENT PERMIT
BINDING SITE PLAN
SHORELINE REVIEWS:
SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT $
CONDITIONAL USE
VARIANCE
EXEMPTION No Charge ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW A
REVISION
J
I, (Print Name) declare that I am (please check one)_the owner of the property involved in this application,_the
authorized representative to act for the property owner (please attach proof of authorization), and that the foregoing statements and answers herein
contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
I ATTEST: Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public,in and
G'P/ for the State of residing at
Name of Owner/Represent ve) on the_day of
ignature of Own epresentative)
Signature of Notary Public)
p<:>:<::<• P= >:«:::CAI :<:C°3::>::<+Pi4<>:C:U A> >:C':' <: ::...i .
MASTERAP.DOC REVISED 8/97
DRAFT ORDINANCE
PERMITTING A-FRAME SIGNS
Additions indicated with underline and omissions by strike outs)
4-11-190S DEFINITIONS:
SIGN, TEMPORARY: Any sign, banner, pennant, valance or advertising display
constructed of cloth, canvas, light fabric, cardboard, wallboar&or other light
materials, with or without frames, intended to be displayed for a limited period of
time only. (Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983; Amd. Ord. 4577, 1-22-1996)
SIGN, PORTABLE: A sign which is not permanently affixed and designed for or
capable of mover]ent, except for those signs explicitly designed for people to
carry on their persons or which are permanently affixed to motor vehicles. (Ord.
3719, 4-11-1983; Amd. Ord. 4577, 1-22-1996)
Sign, A-Frame: A non-illuminated type of portable sign comprised of
hinged panels configured in the shape of the alphabetic letter"A". These
signs contact the ground but not are not anchored to the ground and are
independent of any other structure.
4-4-100C PROHIBITED SIGNS
4-4-10005. Portable Signs: Portable signs or any sign-whico is not permanently
mounted, except for those signs specifically permitted by Section 4-4-100J.
4-4-100C9. Signs on Public Right-of-Way: Signs on public right-of-way other
than temporary and portable signs allowed by subsection J of this Section,
temporaryy-signs, City sponsored signs, and public service signs per subsections
B6b, B6c and B6m of this Section. (Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983)
4-4-100C10. Off1Premises Signs: Except:
a. Temporary and portable signs allowed by subsection J of this Section, City
sponsored signs, and public service signs per subsections B6b, B6c and B6m
of this Section. (Ord. 4172, 9-12-1988; Amd. Ord. 4629, 8-19-1996)
The following code section is unclear and is proposed for deletion due the
ambiguity of the iwording.
b Off-pr-ernise-s--advert+sing--fnay-be-allowed-as--are-accessofy-use--of-ae
identiffcation-Isige-er---other---stfucture--if--the-fotlawiflg-conditions--are--rnet:-
l. The Maximum size of the off premises advertising is six (6) square feet.
ii. No-+pare-than-twenty--five-percent--(25°/0-of-the--principal--structure--is
covered by the off premises advertising sign.
iii. The off premises advertising sign is designed to be viewed by users of
the-facility-rather---than-street--tc--a#+c--(Ord--4-1-72, 9-1-2-1-988)
Rename Section 4-4-100J from "Temporary Signs" to "Temporary and
Portable Signs". Add new Section 4-4-100,15 as follows, retain and
renumber existing Section 4-4-1001.5 and J6.
5. A-Frame Signs: A-frame signs complying with all the following standards
may be permitted:
Number:
Within City Center Sign Regulation Area: Only one of these
signs is permitted per business per street frontage.
Elsewhere in the City: One of these signs is permitted per
business per street frontage and, in addition, an additional sign
is permitted to be located abutting the business and building to
which the sign relates.
ii. Location Requirements:
Permitted Location:
Within City Center Sign Regulation Area: A-frame signs
must be placed against the buildir ici and business to
which the sign relates.
Elsewhere in the City: A-frame signs may be located on
the public sidewalk abutting the business site and/or
within the landscaping area on or abutting the
business site, however, A-frame signs can not be
placed in the landscape strip between the curb and
outer edge of the public sidewalk. Additionally, for
businesses located within shopping centers, an
additional A-Frame sign may be placed against the
building and business to which the sign relates.
Pedestrian Clearance: A minimum of 4' of unobstructed
sidewalk area between the outer edge of the sign and the street
curb is required.
Clear Vision Area: No sign shall be located as to pose a
danger and violate the clear vision area specified in Section 4-4-
10006, Prohibited Signs. Where a traffic vision hazard is
created, the City may require a modification to the height or
location of a sign to the degree necessary to eliminate the
hazard.
iii. Size: Si•ns shall be no lar•er than 32" wide and 36" tall.
iv. Construction Specifications and Materials: The sign must be
professionally manufactured of durable material(s). No
lighting or attachments, such as balloons are permitted.
v. Maintenance and Appearance: Signs must be maintained in
accordance with the provisions of Section 4-4-100D3, "Sign
Maintenance Required", and Section 4-4-100D4,
Appearance of Signs".
2
vi. Alteration of Landscaping Prohibited: No landscaping may be
damaged or modified to accommodate an A-frame siqn. The
City may require replacement of any damaged landscaping
pursuant to RMC Section 4-4-100-0701, Damaqed
Landscaping.
vii. Removal upon Close of Business Required: A-frame signs shall
not be displayed during non-business hours.
viii. Display of Permit and Code Requirements: Any business
displaying an A-frame sign shall have a copy of the sign
permit for the sign posted along with its City business
license. Additionally the business shall post the City's
regulations governing A-frame signs so that employees are
made aware of the standards.
ix. Display of Permit Number: All A-frame signs shall have the sign
permit number a minimum of one half inch in height placed
on the exterior sign face in the upper left-hand corner by the
permittee.
x. Proof of Insurance and Hold Harmless Agreement for Signs on
Public Right of Way: In order to obtain a sign permit,
applicants must provide the Development Services Division
with proof of general commercial liability insurance
Certificate of Liability Insurance) meeting vie requirements
of Section 4-4-100L4. The sign permit application must also
include a signed hold harmless agreement that specifies that
the owner of the sign will defend, indemnify, and hold the
City harmless for any loss, injuries, damage, claims or
lawsuit, including attorney's fees that arise from the sign_
xi. Confiscation of Signs: Signs that do not comply with the provisions
of this Section may be confiscated by the City pursuant to
Section 4-4-100T, Violations and Penalties.
No major code changes, other than broadening the scope of the authority section
to allow enforcement by the Development Services Division's Code Enforcement
Officers, are necessary to ensure A-Frame enforcement and maintenance since
existing Section 4-4-100B currently states:
4-4-1001313 Periodic Inspection of Signs: All signs controlled by this
Section shall be subject to inspection and periodic reinsp-ection by the
Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator. (Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983)
4-4-100134 Authority of Planning/Building/Public Works
Administrator: The Building-Off+cial--Planning/Building/Public Works
Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to enforce all the
provisions of this Section. The Building--4ffioial-•Planning/Building/Public
Works Administrator may order the removal of any sign that is not
3
maintained in accordance with the provisions of subsection D3 of this
Section. (Ord. 2877, 9-9-1974, Amd. Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983)
Rename Section 4-4-100L to "Location, Permit, and /Insurance Requirements for
Signs Projecting into Setbacks or Right of Way".
4-4-100L4: Liability Insurance and-Annual-Permit-Required for Signs
Located On or OYer Public Property;
a. Excluding wall signs projecting twelve inches (12") or less over a public right-
of-way, the owner of any sign projecting located on or over a public right-of-way
shall at the time of sign permit application, file with the Building Official a
Certificate of publ-is Ltiability+Insurance poi-toy-issued by an insurance company
authorized to do Lusiness in the State of Washington,;--appropriately--conditioned
in--confor+ ity-with-the--previ-sions--of--this--Section;-wit#l-limits--of-one-hundred
insurance--and--fifty-thousand--dollar-s--($50 000)-pr-opefty--damage-coverage. _The
City shall be named as an additional insured, and notified of lapses or changes to
the insurance policy in advance of such change. The insurance shall be in the
amount of$1,000,000 per occurrence.
4-4-100L4b5 (New Section):-, Annual Right of Way Use Permit Required for
Signs Proiectin On or Over Public Right of Way: An annual right of way use
sign-permit shall required for any signs projecting over the right-of-way,
excluding wall signs projecting twelve inches (12") or less. Annual fees shall be
consistent with RMC 4-1-140ME. The annual permit shall be issued upon a
determination that liability insurance remains in effect, and that the sign and
supporting structLre are secure. (Ord. 4720, 5-4-1998)
SIGN PERMIT FEES: No changes necessary since Ordinance#4817 recently
established fees for A-Frame Signs at $100.00 for the first sign and $50.00 for
each additional sign.
Other related sign regulation housekeeping amendments: Delete the
following Sections and portions of sections which are contradictory and/or
confusing when considered with our prohibitions against portable and off-premise
signage.
4-4-110.-k9. Nonstructural Trim: Nonstructural
surfaoes-may be of wood, metal, approved plastics or any combination thereof.
4-14460: Portable-Display--Surface: A-.di-splay--surface--temporarily--affixed--to--a
cture to
structure-at-per+o-die--inter-uals-.--(Ord-.--371-9F-4-1--1-1.38S;--Amd:--4r-d-4S77,-1-2- -996)
4
Related landscaping regulation hou$ekeeping amendments: Insert the
following new Section 4-4-100-070/ and retain and renumber the existing Section
4-4-100-070/ to 4-1-100-0701
I. DAMAGED LANSDSCAPING: Any landscaping required by City regulations,
which is damaged) must, at the request of the City, be replaced with like or better
landscaping as d termined by the Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Administrator.
Draft A-Frame Ordinance
5
S
SIGN CODE AMENDMENT PROPOSAL SUMMARY:
Existing Sign Code Provisions: Current City sign regulations prohibit portable, off-
premise signs and most signage on public right of way City-wide (except for real estate
directional signs).
Proposal to Allow A-Frame Signs: The sign code amendment proposal would change
the City's regulations to permit portable A-frame signs in commercial and industrial
zones and rescind the existing moratorium on the portable sign code enforcement. A-
frame signs are also referred to as "sandwich board" signs. Once adopted, the new
regulations would permit A-frame signs subject to certain size and location standards
provided a one-time permit was obtained for each sign. The Council determined that A-
frame signs should ibe allowed City-wide, after giving consideration to only permitting
them in the City Center Sign Regulation Area.
SIGN CODE AMENDMENT PROPOSAL DETAILS:
History and Enforcement Moratorium: Council originally referred the issue of A-frame
signage to Planning and Development Committee after the issue was raised at a Council
meeting in April of tl 998. In May of last year, the Council passed Resolution#3327,
prohibiting enforcement of the A-frame sign restrictions pending further study of the
issue.
Review Team Formed: At Council request, the Development Services Division formed
a twelve member sign code review team comprised of local business owners (including
a sign company) and interested citizens to review the issue of portable A-frame signage.
The Sign Code Review Team met numerous times, reviewed sign regulations from other
jurisdictions, and inspected the existing A-frame signs within the downtown area. The
Review Team did not achieve full consensus on all issues, but the majority of members
concurred with the'recommendations attached as Exhibit A.
Public Hearing: A public hearing to take testimony on the issue was held on
September 27, 1999.
Planning and Development Committee Recommendations: The Planning and
Development Committee recommended and the Council concurred that regulations
permitting A-frame signs be adopted subject to the following:
Size of signs: The draft code allows signs to be a maximum of 32"wide by 36" tall. A
maximum sign size was proposed in lieu of a standardized sign size in order to allow for
specific site conditions. For example, if only 32"wide by 36"tall signs were permitted, a
business building abutting a 6-foot wide sidewalk would not be able to put up any A-
frame signage since such a wide sign would project into the required 4-foot clear
pedestrian area.
Number of Signs: The draft code allows each business one A-frame sign per street
frontage. In addition, businesses outside of the City Center Sign Regulation Area are
also allowed one additional A-frame sign abutting the business building to which the sign
relates.
1
4111
The following example illustrates the number of signs that the new regulations would
permit in the case of a shopping center: The center on the corner of Rainier Avenue
South and Airport Way contains six businesses and at least two street frontages. In this
case, each business could put an A-frame sign on Rainier Avenue and Airport Way. In
addition, each of these businesses could put a sign immediately abutting its individual
business space, resulting in a total of 18 A-frame signs on or abutting the shopping
center property.
Pedestrian Safety and Sign Location: Sidewalk widths in the downtown vary from 8 to
eleven 11 feet in Width. In other commercial areas of the City, sidewalks are typically 5
feet in width. The sign code amendments to permit portable signs include the following
provisions to reduce the potential for pedestrian passage impacts:
Location: Sig s must be placed against the building and business to which the sign
relates in the Dpwntown Sign Regulation Area. Outside the Downtown Sign
Regulation Area, signs will be permitted to be located in (or partially within) a
landscaping strip--as well as on the public sidewalk and adjacent to the business
building. The draft code prohibits alteration of existing landscaping in order to install
a sign.
Pedestrian Clearance: A minimum of 4' of unobstructed sidewalk area is required
to place a sign.
Clear Vision Area: Any regulations adopted should ensure that driver visibility is not
impaired near intersections, including private driveways.
Construction Specifications and Materials: The materials used to construct the signs
must be durable.
Removal of Signs Upon Closure in Evenings/Weekends: The draft code includes a
requirement that these signs be removed in the evenings and/or weekends a business is
closed.
Insurance Requir ments/City Liability: The current code requires an annual sign
permit for signs over public right-of-way and proof of insurance with the City of Renton
named as an additional insured. Minor wording amendments proposed in the draft code
will clarify that insurance is also required for signs on the public right of way. A one-time
permit, rather than an annual permit, however, will be required for A-frame signs.
Sign Maintenance: The current sign code has provisions requiring the maintenance of
signs. The following language is already in the sign code:
Sign Maintenance Required: All signs, together with all of their supports,
braces, guys and anchors, shall be kept in repair and in proper state of
preservation. The surfaces of all signs shall be kept neatly painted or posted at
all times. The ground area shall be neat and orderly. (Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983)
Appearance of Signs: If a sign is visible from more than one direction, all areas
not intended as display surfaces including the back and sioos shall be designed
so that such areas are given a finished and pleasing appearance with the display
surfaces visi le only from the directions that they are intended to be seen. (Ord.
2504, 9-23-1969)
2
Administration and Fees: A $100.00 permit fee ($50.00 for each additional sign) has
already been ado ted via Ordinance#4817. The sign permit number would be required
to be noted on the sign for efficiency in enforcement. The Development Services
Division's code compliance officer will be charged with enforcing the new A-frame
regulations.
Violations of Sigh Code: No changes are needed to ensure compliance since the
current code already provides for removal of illegal signage by the code enforcement
officer and establishes penalties for sign code violations. The current regulations state:
Penalties: Penalties for any violation of any of the provisions of this Chapter
shall be in accord with RMC 1-3-2, Civil Penalties. (Ord. 4351, 5-4-1992) [This
Section allows fines of$100.00 to$500.00 dollars per day depending on the
length of time the violation continues]
Removal and Storage of Illegal Signs Authorized: Unauthorized signs or other
advertising devices either wholly or partially supported on or projecting over the
public right-of-way may be removed by the Building Official or his representative
without no ice to the owner. Such signs or devices shall be stored at the City
garage for a period not to exceed thirty (30) days, during which time the owner
may redeem such sign or device by payment to the City Treasurer an amount
equal to the City cost for the removal and storage, but in no event shall the fee
be less than twenty dollars ($20.00). After expiration of the thirty (30) day storage
period, they sign not having been redeemed, it shall be destroyed or otherwise
disposed of. (Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983, Amd. Ord. 4422, 10-25-1993)
Confiscated Signs: All confiscated signs shall become the property of the City.
Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983)
CONCLUSION:
The Council concluded that the proposed regulations would permit more effective
advertising without substantially compromising pedestrian mobility and safety. Sign
maintenance requirements will ensure they remain attractive during the one-year trial
period.
One-Year Review: The Council will reconsider the new regulations after a one-year
period to ensure the regulations are functioning as intended. Development Services
staff will track the one year time period and prepare a report including the number of sign
code violations and administration time for presentation to the Council at that time.
Moratorium lifted: The existing moratorium on enforcement of the sign code
Resolution#3327) will be rescinded in conjunction with the adoption of the new
regulations.
Attachment: Exhibit A: Sign Code Review Team Recommendations
3
0 0
Exhibit A
REVIEW TEAM RECOMMENDATIONS
The Team did not achieve full consensus on all issues, but the majority of members
concurred with the following changes to the sign code:
Allow in Downtown Only: With the exception of one Team member, a strong advocate
of continued prohibitions against"A-frame" signage due to safety and accessibility
concerns, the majority of the team members concurred to recommend that A-Frame
signs be permitted only in the downtown sign regulation area and only abutting the
business to which the sign relates. The Team felt that permitting A-Frame signs in the
downtown area was warranted due to the pedestrian nature of the area, the City's
emphasis on downtown investment, and the unique concentration of retail businesses in
that area.
City Center Sign Regulation Area
1E- . 4- LE
f.,,,,.,,-; ,,,,,,,,,,,;,,,,n,,, ,,,.; ‘-.---,:::' 1,1-,V,):,,n,-.., . --.' =' •
L \
r_:---14TIlit--:—..:______.___,..--% ' le...1111.111:
t--:—
7.-:::
2.t st .
1j---. 1111 , Ill p f
1
Li I me.
171 lit 1 i_ ..liN '91I
44
I Li
s St rot
1 I 1 1111111111 Ili gi - WE N. % \;=:- Ir*
Illilli.%
1 1 I — _1 • N
1 ____77... moltNM111114zsi-ma
t III= ME i
s r., t
r
Q
1
I• L.._
j all
1=C M
jam _ _
r__,t L i Page 1'of 2
5T_ . , 1,
11111
Team Recommended Number, Size, and Location of A-Frame Signs: The majority
of team members also concurred to recommend that Council permit only standardized
signs of a certain size limited to one per business per street frontage. The Team wished
to ensure that only!sturdy, attractive, wind resistant and professionally produced signs
would be permitted. The specific recommendations of the majority of the Review Team
were as follows:
Number: Only one of these signs should be permitted per business per street
frontage.
Size: The sign must be exactly 32"wide and 36" tall.
Pedestrian Safety and Accessibility Issues: Sidewalk widths in the downtown vary
from 8 to eleven 11 feet in width. In other commercial areas of the City, sidewalks are
typically 5 feet in width. Any sign code amendments to permit portable signs should
include the following provisions to reduce the potential for pedestrian passage impacts:
Location: Signs must be placed against the building and business to which the sign
relates.
Pedestrian Clearance: A minimum of 4' of unobstructed sidewalk area between the
outer edge of the sign and the street curb is required.
Clear Vision Area: Any regulations adopted should ensure that driver visibility is not
impaired near intersections, including private driveways.
Insurance Requirements/City Liability: The Team concurred that insurance should be
required for signs on public right-of-way.
Sign Maintenance: The Team wanted to ensure that A-Frame signs were properly
maintained. No changes are needed to ensure maintenance since•he current sign code
has provisions requiring the maintenance of signs.
Administration: If the Council decides to permit A-Frame signs, the Team, with
concurrence by City sign code enforcement staff, recommended that a sign permit be
required for each A-Frame sign ($100.00 fee). Also the permit number would be
required to be noted on the sign for efficiency in enforcement. The review team
recommended that the Council reconsider the new regulations again after a one-year
period. Development Services staff would track the one year time period and prepare a
report including the number of sign code violations and administration time for
presentation to the Council at that time.
Violations of Sigi Code: The Review Team expressed concern that any new
regulations be effectively enforced. No changes are needed to ensure compliance since
the current code already provides for removal of illegal signage by the code enforcement
officer and establishes penalties for sign code violations. However, additional staff time
will be required to administer(plan review, permit issuance, explaining provisions, etc.)
and enforce the sign code should the Council determine to permit A-Frame signs.
Page 2 of 2
i TON
P.:. . >T,<>ER1,< <::;::: :<:::;;<><.: > '` ``< >>> <><`>` ><<>< «<
PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST:
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21 C RCW, requires all governmental agencies
to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the
quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the
agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can
be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS:
This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal.
Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your
proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most
precise information known, or give the best description you can.
You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases,
you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need
to hire experts. If your really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal,
write"do not know" or"does not apply". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary
delays later.
Some questions ask, about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark
designations. Answerithese question's if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can
assist you.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of
time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your
proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to
explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be
significant adverse impact.
USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS:
Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not
apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D).
For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references in
the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal,"
proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively.
TONDEVELOPMENTENTPIA'Ia,N'
iPM
CITY OF REN
RECEIVED
Environmental Checklist
A. BACKGROUND
1.Name of proposed project, if applicable:
A- F1ZAME- Sid N cope okli E?JD milts
2.Name of applicant:
C I-tY C) etT(17) lxvetopV`'l Dt is toR
3.Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
kO€2 rvicd ' z5 430 `tZ-4
055 s. D Y wAY
4.
aeI'1rods
t pUpA red
boss
Zoo°
5. Agency requesting checklist:
il`( 17E7416N
6.Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
ORD/O C A O'PT?OM 1 N M 2000
7.Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected
with this proposal? If yes, explain.
8.List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared,
directly related to this proposal.
461
9.Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals
directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain.
10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known.
R NA kc'oPRoN Y C: Y Coy c- L.
11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of
the project and site.
Atte-NmoN--m 10 Ck1Y SIN goo() 1 70 s —D i
A- 9&NS c e-rA (0•3 s
2
Environmental Checklist
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise
location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and
range if known.=jlf-a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries-
of the site(s). provide -a legal description, -site plan, vicinity -map, and -topographic--map, if
reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not
required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this .. '
checklist.
Nor
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1.EARTH
a.General description of the site (circle one); flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous,
other
AJA
b.What is the steepest slope on the site(approximate percent slope?)
NA
c.What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat,
muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any
prime farmland.
NA
d. • Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so,
describe.
e.Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading
proposed. Indicate source.of fill.
NA
f.Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally
describe.
NL
g.About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project
construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
NA
h.Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any:
3
IP
Environmental Checklist
2.AIR
a.What types of emissions to the•air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile,
odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If
any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known.
NA
b.Are there any off-site sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? If so,
generally describe.
NA
c.Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any:
3. WATER
a.Surface Water:
1)Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-
round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type
and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into.
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described
waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans.
NA
3)Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from
surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected.
Indicate the source of fill material.
NA
4)Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
NA
5)Does the proposal lie within a 100-year flood plain? If so, note location on the site plan.
NA
6)Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so,
describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
NA
4
Environmental Checklist
b.Ground Water:
1)Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give
generalnnrr description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
V
2)Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other
sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following
chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of
such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of
animal or humans the system(s) are expected to serve.
NA"
c.Water Runoff(including storm water):
1)Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and
disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water
flow into other waters, If so, describe.
NA
2)Could waste material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe.
d.Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if
any:
4.PLANTS
a.Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
shrubs
grass
pasture
crop or grain
wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other
water plants:water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other
other types of vegetation
b.What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
MA-
c.List tireatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
Nit
d.Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance
vegetation on the site, if any:
N
5
Environmental Checklist
5. ANIMALS
a.Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known
to be on or near the site:
Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other
Mammals:deer, bear, elk, beaver, other
Fish: bass, salmon,trout, herring, shellfish, other
VA
b.List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
A)A
c.Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain
Af
d.Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
6.ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
a.What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet
the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating,
manufacturing, etc.
Nk
b.Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so,
generally describe.
OA--
c.What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal?
List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any:
7.ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
a.Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals,
risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this
proposal? If so, describe.
6/AtC, 77-i5E 576,Avs A/`ca 65 P 0A, ae
pfi f3Gii S/S /A/ /t4,afV r CA S,s' 7 POT 7V-T/, -C-
3Ts -f Pe6i//ws 7a 772/P d' o>l z
1)Describe special emergency services that might be required. 6n/5,
NO 9'tc/p 67`fa NGY ` (/icEs si-le /.1O BE Ig J 2ii)
2)Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
S, trf PCA- // r 00/20-/1)75 SAD VL-O /17&41F-
R)1 7 f1/4Z foe PPE-5D?xzw Ii'Sl 774? `( „ 0..s//vr SScs
P8PlA'Y//V' A-Fi A '1& 5'/&fi/s lozl, REZPVire&D 7
izo 1/10 THE Orr d/ ' P OF /ivsateq-ivc N/1/Afr
7 Ci7Y ,4S 44O/17O/V/ii- /A/'S 1, 1
Environmental Checklist
b. Noise
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic,
equipment, operation, other)?
k
2)What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a
short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)?
Indicate what hours noise would come from the site.
3)Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
110
8.LAND AND SHORELINE USE
a.What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
VA-
b.Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe.
Airet
c.Describe any structures on the site.
WA
d.Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
e.What is the current zoning classification of the site?
VA(°Us co kt- 4 t11Q0u s
f.What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
VA1Q X)
g.If applicable,what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site?
NPC
h.Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so,
specify.
NA
i.Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
JA
7
Environmental Checldist
j.Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
k.Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:
1\)Pr-
Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected
land uses and plans, if any:
NA
9.HOUSING
a.Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? _Indicate.whether high,
middle, or low-income housing.
gA-
b.Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high,
middle, or low-income housing.
NA
c.Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
10. AESTHETICS
a.What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is
the principal exterior building material(s) proposed.
4-t.pcyL( NW I-A SU i-) 4-rr )l(,c,
U1WuN PiAW L-S 14us-1- c Da c e
b.What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
c.Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
5(iV S pcQ E rt0 'gam soitoFess to
MpciY0-
11.11. LIGHT AND GLARE
a.What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly
occur?
IJ1
b.Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views?
v
8
Environmental Checklist
c.What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
NOk)-
d.Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
12. RECREATION
a.What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
b.Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe.
No
c.Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation
opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION
a.Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national state, or local
prese ation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe.
AI
b.Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or
cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
NA
c.Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
AlA
14. TRANSPORTATION
a.Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to
the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
A/f
b.Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the '
nearest transit stop?
NA-
c.How,many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the
project eliminate?
Hoge
Environmental Checklist
d.Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or
streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or
private?
No
e.Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air
transportation? If so, generally describe.
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If
known, indicate when peak volumes would occur.
g.Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
NONO
15. PUBLIC SERVICES
a.Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire
protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe.
S DT 5/0/v/F( 4- 77 Aj7p,'T7oAfAf- P Pr11N7" 4/1cE S
Pl v/S/DA1 [AP 77/i Mit 55 l-oUie D 7 X7/1f 11S
b.Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any.NPW
rOe 0A/r roc s s,
16. UTILITIES
a.Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse
service,telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other.
b.Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service,
and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which
might be needed.
C. SIGNATURE
I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and
complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-
significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful
misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part.
Proponent: 01A,44'
Name Printed: ,/A9/O '7 f /V/(04 'r
Date: 7-2O60
10
Environmental Checklist
D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEETS FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS
s,_ot ld onl r be used for ct o involving..decisions:<nn.:;: :o1#ores< .lar 5>€rrrJ
ctfirts "`iiti::cfo::itot:::need#a> ;:
Because these questions•are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the •
list of the elements of the environment.
When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities
likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate •.
than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms.
1.How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production,
storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise?
NA
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are:
No
2.How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life?
Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are:
3.How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?
NA
Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are:
NONA
4.How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas
designated (oir eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness,
wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites,
wetlands, flood plains, or prime farmlands? NA "
5/ows I ULIJ Nor Bg P rzv /Al V4 S
Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are:
10 -
5.How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would
allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans?
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are:
iVON
11
A
t.
Environmental Checklist
6.How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and
utilities?
Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are:
7.Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local,_ state, or federal laws or
requirements for the protection of the environment.
W/Gli Nat' CmN ieT' apPf &Nv/IOM/ f P -off L kVV
SIGNATURE
I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and
complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-
significance that it might issue in reliance upon this 'checklist should there be any willful
misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part.
Proponent: 12iGe/C-at
Name Printed: L,A- Z ) /t//COLAt
Date: 7-
ENVCHLST.DOC
REVISED 6/98
12
December 6, 1999 Renton City Council Minutes Page 429
OLD BUSINESS Council President Parker presented a Committee of the Whole report
Committee of the Whole recommending that Council authorize the Administration to enter into a contract
Parks: Pavilion Building with Columbia Hospitality(CRG Hospitality)to complete the Phase I feasibility
Feasibility Analysis, Columbia analysis and report for the Pavilion building at a cost of$34,760 (including
Hospitality, CAG-99- 29,760 for approximately 310 hours of professional time plus an estimate of
5,000 for expenses, including architect consultation). Staff will report back to
the Committee of the Whole in March of 2000. MOVED BY PARKER,
SECONDED BY SCHLITZER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE
REPORT. CARRIED.
Budget: 2000 Council President Parker presented a Committee of the Whole report
recommending that Council adopt the 2000 Budget as proposed,with the
following changes:
Proposed Budget— $141,480,291
Adds:
Fund 316: Skateboard Park— $150,000
Fund 215: Transfer of excess fund balance to Fund 316 as revenue($820,000)
Fund 207: Transfer of excess fund balance to Fund 316 as revenue($35,000)
Fund 221: Transfer of excess fund balance to Fund 316 as revenue($100,000).
Total Appropriations: $142,585,291.
To cover the cost of I-695 and Council's decision not to increase the card room
tax as proposed by the Mayor,the allocation of the property tax revenue in Fund
316 will now be made in the General Fund. The transfer of excess fund balances
as illustrated above will substitute for the property tax allocation in Fund 316.
The Council also increases revenues to Fund 316 from property sale proceeds to
met the additional requirements of adding an appropriation for the Skateboard
Park.
The Committee further recommended that the ordinance regarding this matter be
presented for first reading. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY
NELSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT.
CARRIED. (See page 431 for ordinance.)
Finance Committee Finance Committee Chair Edwards presented a report recommending approval of
Finance: Vouchers Payroll Vouchers 23000-23223 and 514 direct deposits in the total amount of
962,235.78. MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY NELSON,
COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED.
Planning&Development Planning&Development Committee Chair Keolker-Wheeler presented a report
Committee regarding A-Frame signs. The Committee met four times to consider the staff,
Development Services: Sign Code Review Team, and citizen input concerning amendment of the City's
A-Frame Signs Sign Code. A public hearing on this issue was held on September 27, 1999. The
Committee recommended that the Administration prepare an ordinance amending
the sign regulations for environmental review and consideration by the Council
that incorporates the following recommendations:
1. A-Frame Signs should be permitted: A-Frame Signs should be allowed for
businesses city-wide subject to the proposed standards.
2. Permit process should be streamlined: The Committee recommended that
temporary signs have a simplified permit application form and process, separate
December 6, 1999 Renton City Council Minutes Page 430
from permanent signs.
3. Evaluation of regulations in one year: The Committee recommended that staff
keep record of the number of permits issued, complaints and enforcement issues
and report back to the Council in one year. At that time,the Council can
determine to retain the A-Frame Sign regulations,modify the regulations, or
eliminate the program if necessary.
Item L in the proposed standards regarding removal of A-Frame Signs upon the
daily close of business is the subject of a split Committee report:
Option 1: Require Daily Removal of A-Frame Signage: A-Frame signs are
considered to be temporary signs,however,if these signs were to remain in use
24 hours a day,they would essentially become permanent signs. We are
concerned that if problems should arise with a sign after the close of business,
there would be no one representing the business to deal with the issues. Further,
removal of the signs during non-business hours would reduce the amount of City
liability by reducing the amount of public exposure to the signs. In addition,
removal upon close of business would reduce the amount of sign clutter during
the times when the business is not open. With Council concurrence,we would
request that the Administration prepare an ordinance amending the sign code
which includes a requirement for daily removal of A-Frame signs during non-
business hours.*
hours.
MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON,
COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT WITH OPTION#1.**
Councilman Edwards supported Option#1 which would require daily removal of
A-Frame signs, since such signs are made to be portable and meant to be
temporary rather than permanent in nature. Councilmember Nelson agreed,
saying that A-Frame signs should be removed to the interior of the business
during non-business hours.
While Councilman Corman also supported Option#1,he suggested that the City
look into allowing small,permanent directional signs for stores located some
distance from the street entrance;for example,in a strip mall. He felt that A-
Frame signs should not be used as directional signage.
Councilman Schlitzer said while some concerns have been expressed regarding
A-Frame signs,the question of whether they should be able to be displayed
around the clock was never an issue. He said many A-Frame signs have been left '
out all day and night in the past without any problems or complaints.
Councilmember Keolker-Wheeler responded that daily removal of A-Frame signs
will help lessen visual clutter in the City. She added that the presence of an A-
Frame sign makes it appear as if the business is open, when it may not be.
December 6, 1999 Renton City Council Minutes Page 431
Saying he is a proponent of A-Frame signs, Council President Parker said these
should be an asset to Renton rather than a liability. He supported Option#1 in
the spirit of compromise, since the City will be allowing A-Frame signs rather
than prohibiting them.
MOTION CARRIED TO APPROVE THE COMMITTEE REPORT WITH
OPTION#1.
Ms. Keolker-Wheeler expressed appreciation to the Sign Code Review Team
which was able to formulate recommendations despite the various and sometimes
competing views its members brought to the table. She also thanked staff for
having done a tremendous amount of work on this project.
ORDINANCES AND The following ordinance was presented for first reading and advanced for second
RESOLUTIONS and final reading:
Budget: 2000 An ordinance was read adopting the annual budget for the year 2000 in the total
amount of$142,585,291. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY
EDWARDS, COUNCIL SUSPEND THE RULES AND ADVANCE THE
ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED.
Ordinance#4818 Following second and final reading of the above-referenced ordinance, it was
Budget: 2000 MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT
THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED.
The following ordinances were presented for second and final reading:
Ordinance#4819 An ordinance was read annexing approximately 12 acres located east of
Annexation: Smith Hoquiam Ave.NE(142nd Ave. SE),generally between SE 113th and 116th
Streets across from Hazen High School(Smith Annexation,A-98-002).
MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY CORMAN,
COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL
AYES. CARRIED.
Ordinance#4820 An ordinance was read establishing the zoning classification of 12 acres located
Annexation: Smith,Zoning east of Hoquiam Ave.NE(142nd Ave. SE),generally between SE 113th and
116th Streets across from Hazen High School annexed to the City of Renton to
Residential-Five Dwelling Units per Acre(R-5)and Residential-Eight
Dwelling Units per Acre(R-8)for the Smith Annexation. MOVED BY
KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADOPT
THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED.
NEW BUSINESS Council President Parker opened nominations for 2000 Council President.
Council: 2000 Council
Councilman Edwards nominated Councilman Randy Corman to serve as CouncilPresidentElection(Corman)
President in 2000.
There being no further nominations, it was MOVED BY PARKER,
SECONDED BY EDWARDS,NOMINATIONS BE CLOSED. CARRIED.
MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY SCHLITZER, COUNCIL SELECT
COUNCILMAN RANDY CORMAN AS COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR 2000.
CARRIED.
Council: 2000 Council Mr. Parker then opened nominations for 2000 Council President Pro tem.
President Pro Tern(Schlitzer)
Councilwoman Keolker-Wheeler nominated Councilman Tim Schlitzer to serve
as Council President Pro tern in 2000.
APPROVED DI/
CITY COUNCIL
PLANNING AND DEVELMENT COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE REPORT Date /efi ' '`fy
December 6, 1999
A-Frame Signs
Referred April 27, 1998
The Planning and Development Committee met four times to consider the staff,Sign Code Review Team,and
citizen input concerning amendment of the City's Sign Code. A public hearing on the issue was held on September
27, 1999. The Committee recommends that the Administration prepare an ordinance amending the sign regulations
for environmental review aid consideration by the Council that incorporates the following recommendations:
1. A-Frame Signs should be permitted: A-Frame Signs should be allowed for businesses Citywide subject to the
standards listed in Exhibit A.
2. Permit process should be streamlined: The Committee recommends that temporary signs have a simplified
permit application form a d process,separate from permanent signs.
3. Evaluation of regulations in oneyear: The Committee recommends that staff keeprecord of the number of
permits issued,complaints)and enforcement issues and report back to the Council in one year. At that time the
Council can determine to etain the A-Frame Sign regulations,modify the regulations,or eliminate the program if
necessary.
Item L in Exhibit A regarcing removal of A-FrameSigns'upon the daily close of business is the subject of a split
Committee Report:
OPTION 1: Require Daily Removal of A-Frame Signage A-Frame signs are considered to be temporary signs,
however,if these signs were to remain in use 24:hours day,they wouldessentially become permanent signs. We
are concerned that if problems should arise with a sign'after the close of business,there would be no one
representing the business to deal with the issues.;Further,removal of the signs during non-business hours would
reduce the amount of City liability by reducing the amount'Of public exposure to the.signs. In addition,removal
upon close of business would reduce the amount of sign clutter during the times when the business is not open. . .
With Council concurrence,we would request that the'Administration prepare an ordinance amending the sign code
which includes a:requirerrient for daily removal during non-business hours.
iaeeler, hafr em er
OPTION 2:Do Not Require Daily Removal of A-Frame Signage: During the enforcement moratorium,and even
longer for some businesses,a number of businesses have displayed these signs for 24 hour periods with no reported
problems.`I maintain that we should try permitting A-Frame signs on a 24-hour basis..Then,if there are problems
that arise,they can be addressed by Council when this issue is revisited again in a year. With Council concurrence,I
would request that the Administration prepare an ordinance amending the sign code which does not include a
requirement for daily removal during non-business hours.
V
Schlitzer,s t mate
EXHIBIT A
1. Sign Standards: A-frame signs complying with all the following standards may be permitted:
a. Number of Signs Permitted:
i. Within City Center Sign Regulation Area: Only one of these signs is permitted per business per
street frontage.
ii. Elsewhere in the City: One of these signs is permitted per business per street frontage and,in
addition,one additional sign is permitted to be located abutting the business and building to which the
sign relates.
b. Permitted Location:
i. Within City Center Sign Regulation Area: A-Frame signs must be placed against the building and
business to which the sign relates.
ii. Elsewhere in the City: A-Frame signs may be located on the public sidewalk abutting the business
site and/or within the landscaping abutting the business site. Additionally,for businesses located within
shopping centers,an additional A-Frame sign may be placed against the building and business to which
the sign relates
c. Pedestrian Clearance: A minimum of 4'of unobstructed sidewalk area is required to place an A-Frame
sign.
d. Clear Vision Area: No sign shall be located so as to pose a danger and violate the clear vision area
specified in Section 44-10006,Prohibited Signs. Where a traffic,vision hazard is created,the City may
require a modificatio
I to the height or location of a sign to the degree necessary to eliminate the hazard.
e. Size: Signs shall be no larger than 32"...wide and 36"=tall..;.,g
f. Construction Specifications and Materials: -The sign must be professionally manufactured of durable
material(s). No lighting or attachments,such as balloons are permitted:
g. Maintenance and Appearance: Signs must be well maintained in accordance with the existing sign code
provisions of Sections 4-4-100D3,Sign Maintenance Required and Section 4-4-100D4,Appearance of Signs.
h. Alteration of Landscaping Prohibited: No landscaping may be damaged or modified to accommodate a
sign placed on the right of way.
i. Permit Requirements: Any business displaying an A-Frame sign shall be required to obtain a permit and
have a copy of the sign permit for each sign posted along with its City business license. Additionally the
business shall post the City's regulations governing A-Frame signs so that employees are made aware of the
standards. All A-Frame signs shall have the sign permit number a minimum of one-half inch in height placed
in the upper left-hand corner by the permittee.
j. Proof of Insurance for A-Frame Signs on Public Right of Way/Sidewalk: Upon recommendation of the
City Attorney and the City's Risk Management Department,proof of insurance with the City named as an
additional insured shall be required in order to obtain a sign permit. The insurance amount shall be in an
amount recommended by the City's Risk Management Department. .
k. Confiscation of Signs: The City may confiscate signs that do not comply with the provisions of this
Section. .
1. Removal upon Close of Business Required: A-Frame signs shall not be displayed during non-business . `- _ -.
hours.
OPTION 2: Do Not It.equire Removal of A-Frame Signage During Non-Business Hours: During the
enforcement moratorium,and even longer for some businesses,a number of businesses have displayed
these signs for 24 hours periods with no reported problems. Therefore,A-Frame signs should be permitted
on a 24-hour basis. Then,if there are problems that arise,they can be addressed by Council when this issue
is revisited again in a year. The following Committee member recommends that the ordinance amending
the sign code not include a requirement for removal during non-business hours.
Tim Schlitzer, Alternate Member
12/06/99 15:17 FAX ,"?777242 WA CITIES INS AU 4001/001
A •
m!! q l,II II;I Pliii'11 !'
1I 1 1 dil ii;liil'I I"IIJ I+ii4'll•'j'''ji Sj
iil
i tl e Siiiqi+'+;i j',is,,1;::I';;i+,'„
Insuraxce Authority
FAX Washington Cities Insurance Authority
Ed Fridensti'nc
Date: December ', 1999 P.O. Box 11i65
Renton, WA 98057
425-277-7237
To:Paulie Sulky Fax: 425-277-7242
City Renton Ecif@wciapon).org
Fax 425/430-7 65
Number:
From: Ed Fridenstine, WCIA
z-fle)
2
Number of pages including cover sheet 1
Re: Sandwich Boards (Movable Signs)
Mike asked for WCIA guidance on merchants placing movable signs on City sidewalks and how they should be
addressed in the Municipal Code.
The Authority is not in favor of the placement of these signs on sidewalks for liability reasons. The signs have
the potential to interfere with pedestrian use of the sidewalks. They can create trip hazards, blocking problems
and possible vision obstructions. If you decide to allow the placement of these signs,we recommend the
following:
1. The owner of the sign needs to provide proof of Commercial General Liability insurance as part of the
permit process and add the City to that policy as an additional insured. We prefer a$1,000,000 limit on the
policy of insurance. The existing City Code seems to ask for $100,000 to S300,000, which is confusing.
The code probably intended to ask for limits of$100,000 per person and S300,000 per occurrence. CGL
coverage is now written with a single limit so these numbers should be changed to at least $500,000 or
preferably $1,000,000.
2. A hold harmless claue that specifies that the owner of the sign will defend, indemnify, and hold the City
harmless for any loss injuries, damage, claims or lawsuit, including attorneys fees that arise from the sign
except for the sole negligence of the City should be part of the signed permit after review and approval by
your City Attorney.
CITY RENTON
Office of the City Attorney
Jesse Tanner,Mayor Lawrence J.Warren
DEVELOPM
Of Y OFENTRENTONPLANNING
MEMORANDUM N O V 2:3 .1999
RECEIVED
To:. •Laureen Nicolay,,Associate Planner
From:Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney
Date: November 22, 1999
Subject: • Ordinance Amending Subsection 4-1-140.M.3 of Chapter 1, of Title 4, by
Establishing Permit'Fees for A-Frame Signs
I am enclosing a copy of le above-referenced ordinance, the original of which has been sent to
the City Clerk.
Lawrence J. Warren
LJW:as.
End.
cc: Jay Covington
Marilyn J. Petersen
A8:168.32:
Post Office Box 626 100 S. 2nd Street Renton, Washington 98057 (425)255-8678
This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%,post consumer '
1
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON,
AMENDING SUBSECTION 4-1-140.M.3 OF CHAPTER 1,
ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT, OF TITLE 4
DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS), OF ORDINANCE NO. 4260
ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF
RENTON, WASHINGTON" BY ESTABLISHING PERMIT FEES FOR A-
FRAME SIGNS.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO OF
AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. Subsection 4-1-140.M.3 of Chapter 1, Administration and Enforcers.
Title 4 (Development Regulations), of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordi
of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows:
3. TE14PORARY SIGNS:
Grand'Opening Signs, Banners, 5.00
Streamers, etc. for Businesses
with Less than 5 Employees
pursuant to RMC 4-4-100.J.5
Grand Opening Signs, Banners, 25.00
Streamers, etc. for Businesses
with 5 or More Employees
pursuant to RMC 4-4-100.J.5
Political Signs There shall be no fee for
political signs
Real Estate Directional Signs $15.00 per sign for a 6 month
on Public Right-of-Way period with a renewal fee of
10.00 for a 3 month period
with only one renewal allowed
A-Frame Signs 100.00 for the first sign and
50.00 for each additional sign
Other Temporary Signs 15.00 plus a deposit of
pursuant to RMC 4-4-100J6, $100.00 which shall be forfeited
Signs tVithin City Center if the applicant fails to remove
the sign when the permit expires
ORDINANCE NO.
SECTION II. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and thirty days
after publication.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of 1999.
Marilyn J. Petersen, City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of 1999.
Jesse Tanner, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney
Date of Publication:
ORD.806:11/22/99:as.
November 22, 1999 Renton City Council Minutes Page 418
Mayor Tanner urged Council to consider what would happen if voters denied the
City's request for funding a project or projects which resulted from non-
negotiable federal mandates. Mr. Corman replied that if the City was unable to
meet federal safe water standards due to lack of funding for capital projects,
voters would have to be warned that Renton's water may not be fit for drinking.
Noting that a good percentage of utility revenues pays for employees who do the
necessary work to provide this service, Councilmember Keolker-Wheeler said
many union contracts contain inflationary clauses for salaries. Capital projects
are one thing,but personnel costs will increase as well. She emphasized that
Council can always choose to not increase rates if it determines that an increase
is not needed.
Mayor Tanner concurred, saying that the ordinance contains both the CPI and the
5%figures for the purpose of reminding Council, on an annual basis,to consider
and decide this issue. He added that rates will not be raised in 2000, and there is
no reason to raise them in 2001 unless some unexpected,worst-case scenarios
occur.
Councilman Edwards commented that he would not want for the City's property
tax or other General Fund revenues to be used for personal water consumption.
Councilman Corman explained that his objection to the ordinance is the inclusion
of the 5%potential annual increase. He said that because of the way the
ordinance is written,the region could theoretically experience no inflation over
the next 15 years,yet utility rates could double if the 5%rate increase was
continually enacted. He added that the ordinance does not lay out a mechanism
whereby Council can decline to impose the 5%rate increase, or indeed any
increase at all.
Mayor Tanner said Council will forever retain the authority to modify this
ordinance in whatever way it wishes to,either by approving amendments to it or
by repealing it outright. He emphasized that he has no interest in raising utility
rates,even by the Consumer Price Index.
Council President Parker noted that this ordinance would offer to the City's
bonding companies the assurances that Renton could provide additional capital,
if needed, for its utility system. He felt it would be irresponsible not to enact this
legislation as written.
MOTION CARRIED TO REFER MS. PETERSEN'S LETTER TO THE
COMMUTEE OF THE WHOLE.
OLD BUSINESS Planning&Development Committee Chair Keolker-Wheeler presented a report
Planning&Development recommending that the fee schedule be revised and an ordinance be adopted
Committee establishing permit fees for A-frame signs. The Committee recommended a fee
Development Services: A- of$100.00 for the first sign and$50.00 for any additional A-frame signs. This
Frame Sign Fees recommendation is based on feedback from City Code enforcement staff and is
generally consistent with the recommendations of a majority of the Sign Code
Review Team members. The A-frame sign standards recommendations will be
reported out of Planning&Development Committee at the December 6, 1999
Council meeting. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY
CLAWSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT.
CARRIED.
November 22, 1999 Renton City Council Minutes Page 421
Transportation: Commute Trip interlocal cooperative agreement with King County entitled"Commute Trip
Reduction Act Funds,King Reduction Act Interlocal Agreement." MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED
County(1999-2001) BY CORMAN, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ.
CARRIED.
The following ordinances were presented for first reading and referred to the
Council meeting of 12/06/99 for second and final reading:
Annexation: Smith An ordinance was read annexing approximately 12 acres located east of
Hoquiam Ave.NE(142nd Ave. SE),generally between SE 113th and 116th
Streets across from Hazen High School(Smith Annexation,A-98-002).
MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON,
COUNCIL REFER.THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL
READING ON 12/06/99. CARRIED.
Annexation: Smith,Zoning An ordinance was read establishing the zoning classification of 12 acres located
east of Hoquiam Ave.NE(142nd Ave. SE),generally between SE 113th and
116th Streets across from Hazen High School annexed to the City of Renton to
Residential-Five Dwelling Units per Acre(R-5)and Residential-Eight
Dwelling Units per Acre(R-8)for the Smith Annexation. MOVED BY
KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL REFER
THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 12/06/99.
CARRIED.
The following ordinances were presented for second and final reading:
Ordinance#4814 An ordinance was read amending subsection 8-5-1.5.D of Chapter 5, Sewers, of
Budget: 2000 Utility Rates Title VIII(Health and Sanitation)of City Code relating to 2000 utility rates for
Pass-Through of King all customer classes. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN,
County/Metro Increase) COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL
AYES. CARRIED.
Ordinance#4815 An ordinance was read amending Sections 8-1-9 of Chapter 1, Garbage, 8-2-3.E
Budget: Automatic Increases in of Chapter 2, Storm and Surface Water Drainage, 8-4-31.B of Chapter 4,
Future Utility Rates Water,and 8-5-15.A of Chapter 5, Sewers,of Title VIII(Health and Sanitation)
of City Code relating to automatic increases in utility rates. MOVED BY
EDWARDS, SECONDED BY PARKER, COUNCIL ADOPT THE
ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: FOUR AYES (PARKER,
KEOLKER-WHEELER,EDWARDS,NELSON);TWO NAYS (CLAWSON,
CORMAN). CARRIED.
The following ordinances were presented for first reading and advanced to second
and final reading:
Budget: 1999 Year-end An ordinance was read providing for the 1999 year-end Budget adjustments and
Ac';ustments establishing the Leased City Properties Fund. MOVED BY EDWARDS,
SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADVANCE THE ORDINANCE FOR
SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED.
Ordinance#4816 Following second and final reading of the above-referenced ordinance, it was
Buo,set: 1999 Year-end MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY PARKER, COUNCIL ADOPT
Adjustments THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED.
Development Services: A- An ordinance was read amending subsection 4-1-140.M.3 of Chapter 1,
Frame Sign Fees Administration and Enforcement, of Title IV(Development Regulations)of City
Code by establishing permit fees for A-frame signs. MOVED BY KEOLKER-
WHEELER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ADVANCE THE
November 22, 1999 Renton City Council Minutes
ORDNANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED.
Ordinance#4817 Following second and final reading of the above-referenced ordinance, it
Development Services: A- MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON,
Frame Sign Fees COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: A
AYES. CARRIED.
NEW BUSINESS MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL CA
Council: Meeting Cancellation THE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AND COMMITTEE OF THI
12/27/99) WHOLE MEETING ON 12/27/99. CARRIED.
Council: Meeting Cancellation MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL C.
1/03/2000) THE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AND COMMITTEE OF THI
WHOLE MEETING ON 1/03/2000. CARRIED.
ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADJ(
CARRIED. Time: 9:30 p.m.
MARILYN J. PETERSEN, CMC, City Clerk
Recorder: Brenda Fritsvold
November 22, 1999
UO Lr" APPROVED DY
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CITY COUNCILtiI
CITY OF RENTON
NOV 2 3 1999 PLANNING AND DEVELMENT COMMITTEE Date //-a a' 97
COMMITTEE REPORT
RECEIVED November 22, 1999
Fees for A-Frame Signs
Referred April 27, 1998
The Planning and Development Committee recommends that the fee schedule be revised and an ordinance
be adopted establishing!permit fees for A-Frame Signs. The Committee recommends a fee of$100.00 for
the first sign and$50.0b for any additional A-Frame Signs. This recommendation is based upon feedback
from City code enforcement staff and is generally consistent with the recommendations of a majority of the
Sign Code Review Team members. The A-Frame sign standards recommendations will be reported out of
Planning&Development Committee at the December 6, 1999 Council meeting.
15/N
Kathy Keolk -Wheeler,Chair
Dan Clawson,Member
Timothy J.Schlitzer,Alternate Member
rn
CcOrte--0
lAntt u.Z.
ke (Aft-U.- C'tClir
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
Charlotte Ann Kassens first duly sworn on oath states that he/she is the Legal Clerk of the
SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL
600 S. Washington Avenue, Kent, Washington 98032
CITY OF RENTON
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
a daily newspaper published seven (7) times a week. Said newspaper is a legal RENTON CITY COUNCIL
newspaper of general publication and is now and has been for more than six months NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the
Renton City Council has fixed the 27th daypriortothedateofpublication, referred to, printed and published in the English language of September, 1999, at 7:30 p.m. as the
continually as a daily newspaper in Kent, King County, Washington. The South County date and time for a public hearing to be
Journal has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the
held in the seventh floor Council ChambersStateofWashingtonforKingCounty.of the Renton Municipal Building, 1055 S.The notice in the exact form attached, was published in the South County Grady Way,Renton,,98055,to-consider the 1Journal (and not in supplemental form)which was regularly distributed to the subscribers following:
i A-Frame Signsduringthebelowstatedperiod. The annexed notice, a All interested parties are invited to attend'
the public hearing and present written or
A-Frame Signs oral comments regarding the proposal.
The Municipal Building is fully accessible;
and interpretive services for the hearing ;
as published on: 9/17/99 impaired will be provided upon prior notice.
Call 430-6510 for additional information.
Marilyn Petersen
The full amount of the fee arged for sa' oregoing publication is the sum of$28.75, City Clerk_
charged to Acct. No. 80 640. Published in the South County Journal
I September 17,1999.6587 _ _ _______ .
Legal Number 6587
Legal ou na
Subscribed an i-sworn-before-me-on-this Z day-of— - - --'---H97 —
o`
FC
F1,,co 4
el o00Feffpp p9pe Y r
q ?'' ^' ;(A, Notary Public of the State of Washington
o
TkR
cp•• p residing in Renton
F ' y e King County, Washington
6
ikf,.LP c: o
i oi O
eo;eOF a A o o 000
CITY OF RENTON
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
RENTON CITY COUNCIL
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 27th day of
September, 1999, at.7:30 p.m. as the date and time for a public hearing to be held in the
seventh floor Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building, 1055 S. Grady Way,
Renton, 98055, to consider the following:
A-Frame Signs
All interested parties are invited to attend the public hearing and present written or oral
comments regarding the proposal. The Municipal Building is fully accessible, and
interpretive services for the hearing impaired will be provided upon prior notice. Call
430-6510 for additional information.
dif r
Marilyn P'er
City Clerk
Published South County Journal
September 17, 1999
Account No. 50640
9/15/99 - Notice mailed to Parties of Record (12) (over)
Alice Maxwell Marge Richter Bruce Anderson
465 Renton Ctr.Way SW 300 Meadow Ave.N 101 Park Ave.N -
Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA. 98055
Dominic Gatto Beverly Franklin Denise M.Cartwright
1425 S.Puget Dr.#N5 P.O.Box 685 P.O.Box 4064
Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98057 Renton,WA 98057-4064
Phillip Beckley Heidi Carlson
364 Renton Center Way SW#56A-156 Debbie Wicks 806 Index Ct.NE
Renton,WA 98055 465 Renton Center Way SW -Renton,WA 98056
Renton,WA 98055
Sam Pace Al Gould Fred Pierson
3905— 154th Ave. SE 14021 SE 136th St. C/O GFC Signs
Bellevue,WA 98006 Renton,WA 98059 253A Rainier Ave.S
Renton,WA 98055
September 27, 1999 Renton City Council Minutes Page 327
Continuing,Mr. Dennison said as with other annexations,the streets and
drainage systems are generally below Renton standards. These would be
improved with development of the adjacent properties. The area is within Water
District 90's service area, and it is assumed that the District would continue to
provide water service upon annexation. Renton would provide sewer service,
which is not now available in the area.
Mr. Dennison concluded that the proposed annexation is generally consistent
with Renton's Comprehensive Plan annexation policies and the objectives of the
King CountyBoundary Review Board. Staff recommends that Council accept
the 10%Notice of Intent to Annex petition.
Responding to Councilman Clawson,Mr. Dennison said the eastern urban
growth boundary lies approximately one-half mile-rvxn the proposed annexation
area.
Audience comment was invited.
Correspondence was read from Janice M. Spoon, 16701 SE May Valley Rd.,
Renton, 98059, supporting the annexation as one of the affected property owners.
Correspondence was also read from Victoria Troisi, 14630 SE 132nd St.,
Renton, 98056, stating that she opposes the annexation because it will bring
cheaply-made multi-family housing into the area. Claiming that the proposed
development would cut her neighborhood in half,Ms. Troisi inquired about the
annexation process and expressed her concerns about the existence of a wetland
in this area and the fact that one of the property owners is already filling in land
to prepare it for development.
MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL DIRECT
THE ADMINISTRATION TO RESPOND TO THE VARIOUS QUESTIONS
AND ASSERTIONS CONTAINED IN MS. TROISI'S LETTER. CARRIED.
MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL: ACCEPT
THE 10%NOTICE OF INTENT TO ANNEX;AUTHORIZE CIRCULATION
OF THE 60%PETITION;REQUIRE ADOPTION OF CITY ZONING ON
THE PROPERTY CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN;
AND REQUIRE THAT THE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSUME A
PROPORTIONAL SHARE OF THE CITY'S BONDED INDEBTEDNESS.
CARRIED.
PUBLIC HEARING The proper notices having been posted and published in accordance with local
Development Services: and State laws,Mayor Tanner opened the public hearing to consider A-frame
A-Frame Signs signs.
Laureen Nicolay,Associate Planner, explained that the issue of A-frame signs,
which are prohibited under current Renton City Code,was referred to the
Planning &Development Committee last year after Council received public
comment on this subject. At the same time, Council imposed a moratorium on
enforcement of the prohibition against such signs pending further study.
Subsequently, a twelve-member sign code review team was formed to develop
recommendations to the Council on this issue. The review team consisted of
local business owners and interested citizens.
Ms.Nicolay said the review team held numerous eetings during which it
reviewed sign regulations from other jurisdiction: ';id inspected existing A-fran..:;
Sejember 27, 1999 Renton City Council Minutes Page 328
signs in Renton's downtown. Of 22 local jurisdictions contacted, only Sumner
permits A-frame signs for other than real estate purposes.
Continuing, Ms.Nicolay said the review team was unable to achieve full
consensus on all issues;however, a majority of the members concurred with the
following recommended changes to Renton's Sign Code:
1. Allow A-frame signs in the downtown sign regulation area only, and only
abutting the business to which the sign relates. The team felt this was warranted
due to the pedestrian nature of the area,the City's emphasis on downtown
investment, and the unique concentration of retail businesses in that area.
2. The A-frame signs to be allowed should be standardized signs, exactly 32"
wide and 36"tall, and limited to one per business per street frontage.
3. Signs should be placed against the building and business to which they relate,
and a minimum four-foot clearance of unobstructed sidewalk area between the
outer edge of the sign and the street curb should be required to allow for adequate
pedestrian passage.
4. Each sign owner should provide proof of insurance,with the City named as
additional insured.
5. An initial sign permit of$100 should be required for each A-frame sign.
6. If the new regulations are adopted, Council should revisit them after one year
to assess their impacts.
Ms.Nicolay noted that additional issues requiring further discussion by the
Planning&Development Committee involve: whether to specify an exact sign
size or to allow for a range of sizes;whether to allow signs to be constructed of
only certain materials; whether to require that signs be removed when businesses
are closed; if an annual permit fee should be imposed(and if so, in what amount);
whether a minimum sign face size should be established; and whether A-frame
signs should be allowed city-wide.
Commenting that strong differences of opinion remain on this subject,
Councilmember Keolker-Wheeler said this matter will remain in the Planning&
Development Committee.
Councilman Edwards expressed his preference that the second A-frame sign fee,
relating to monitoring and enforcement of any imposed regulations,be less than
100 per year, since this figure is based on actual estimated administrative costs.
Mayor Tanner noted that the City typically sets permit fees so they recoup 60%
of the costs associated with issuing the permit.
Audience comment was invited.
Debbie Wicks, 2508 Kennewick Pl.NE,Renton, said that the two A-frame signs
used by her business,Fashion West, are very important. She disagreed with one
of the proposed recommendations, saying that it would be nearly impossible for
her business to bring these signs in every day, as these are located a distance
away from the store. She felt it was a safety issue for her employees who would
be reluctant to recover the signs after dark. Ms.Wicks added that if the signs are
left on the street frontage,they can continue to serve as advertising even when the
store is closed.
September 27, 1999 Renton City Council Minutes Page 329
In response to a question from Councilman Corman, Ms. Keolker-Wheeler
explained that because Fashion West is located outside of the downtown sign
regulation area, it would be allowed to keep its A-frame signs only if Council
decided that these be permitted city-wide. If A-frames are allowed throughout
the City, Council would have to decide where these could be placed for
businesses such as Fashion West,which are set back substantially from the
street. The question of whether these signs wot'Ae have to be removed when the.
businesses are closed would also have to be resolved.
Responding to Council President Parker,Ms.Wicks said she felt that A-frame
signs should be allowed city-wide in the interest of fairness to all businesses.
Beverly Franklin, 210 Wells Ave. S., Renton, 98055, stated that the small
businesses in the downtown bring in a lot of money from out-of-state visitors.
Speaking from experience, she said she could spend much money advertising her
business in other ways but would not realize the return on her investment that her
A-frame sign generates. Responding to fears that if these signs are allowed city-
wide,they will then proliferate, she estimated that their numbers would increase
less than 10%because most businesses who want these already have them.
Heidi Carlson, 806 Index Ct.NE,Renton, 98056,noted that most other cities
contacted about this issue don't allow A-frame signs, and she felt that Renton
shouldn't either. Instead, she preferred allowing permanent signs set in concrete
which are attractive and which eliminate the various problems associated with A-
frame signs. Saying that A-frames only detract from businesses, she urged the
City to unclutter Renton and offer attractive business areas for investors and
customers alike. Ms. Carlson suggested that, if Council allows these signs, it
impose an annual fee prohibitive enough to effectively prevent business owners
from applying for a permit.
Phillip Beckley, 655 Ferndale Ct.NE, Renton, 98056, said that A-frame signs do
not enhance Renton's image and that the City should strive for a more attractive
look than that which results from a proliferation of such signs. Suspecting that
Council will ultimately allow A-frames in the downtown area for a trial period of
one year,he asked that the review team be allowed to continue meeting during
this time to further evaluate the impacts of these signs.
Alice Maxwell, 6646 - 114th Ave. SE,Bellevue,WA, stated that her business,
Fashion West,has used A-frame signs for 29 years without any problems
whatsoever. She claimed to get more results from these signs than from any
other type of advertising, and said that although Bellevue and Seattle might
prohibit these signs,those regulations are not enforced. Ms. Maxwell said if her
business is allowed to keep its A-frames, she did not want to be required to
remove them when her store is closed due to safety concerns.
Councilman Corman wondered why,if the store wants to leave its A-frame signs
out on a permanent basis,it does not instead install permanent signs in their
place. Ms. Maxwell stated that she has approached Fred Meyer about getting a
permanent sign for Fashion West,but Fred Meyer allows these only for the larger
stores.
Responding to Councilman Clawson,Ms. Maxw.3 said she did not believe that
the proposed regulations would result in a proliferation of A-frames throughout
the City since these are now essentially allowed without a fee. She suggested that
if the City starts charging a fee for them,fewer businesses will have them than
September 27, 1999 Renton City Council Minutes Page 330
currently do so.
Mr. Corman felt this was specious reasoning, since A-frames aren't currently
allowed under City Code but the proposed regulations would formally legalize
them. Therefore,the past can't be looked to as an example of what would
happen if the signs were officially allowed.
Council President Parker commented that these signs do benefit the businesses
that use them and, in his view,they can be regulated very simply.
There being no further audience comment,it was MOVED BY EDWARDS,
SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
CARRIED.
Councilman Corman hoped that the Planning&Development Committee will
consider alternatives to A-frame signs that would sufficiently promote businesses
and make it easy for customers to locate stores.
After being alerted that someone else wished to speak to this matter, it was
MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY PARKER, COUNCIL REOPEN
THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED.
Doug Cartwright, 3815 NE 4th#C-60, Renton, stated that A-frame signs, as well
as construction signs,pose serious safety issues to wheelchair users such as
himself. He said some of the A-frames which he encounters cannot be
maneuvered around, so he must pick them up and move them out of his way.
Responding to Councilman Edwards,Ms.Nicolay said under the proposed
regulations,A-frame owners would have to provide a site plan to the City
showing exactly where the sign would be located and depicting the minimum
clearance area from the sign to the curb.
MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL CLOSE
THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED.
ADMINISTRATIVE City Clerk Marilyn Petersen reviewed a written administrative report
REPORT summarizing the City's recent progress towards goals and work programs
adopted as part of its business plan for 1999 and beyond. Items noted included:
Paving of the Cedar River Park trail will be completed this week,with
hydroseeding of the park scheduled for next va :k.
The City's contractor on the SW 23rd St. culvert clean-up project has
finished hauling the petroleum-contaminated soil to the disposal site.
Three new after-school pilot programs begin next week at McKnight Middle
School, featuring bowling,golf, and roundball.
AUDIENCE COMMENT Janice Brown, 5247 S. 51st Ct., Renton,president of the Summit Park
Citizen Comment: Brown—Townhome and Condominium Homeowners'Association, said that the Sikh
Sikh Temple on Talbot Road Temple's radio station has neither been shut down nor removed although it is
operating without a permit, in violation of City Code. She wondered if the
flagpole outside of the temple which the Sikhs claim is used for religious
ceremonies was, in fact,built to disguise the radio antenna. Referring to
problems which have occurred at this location in the recent past, she noted that
the site's landscaping is supposed to be completed before the end of this week.
Mayor Tanner replied that the City is carefully monitoring this troublesome yet
September 27, 1999 Renton City Council Minutes Page 331
complex situation.
Citizen Comment: Ford— Lee Ford, 372 Stevens Ave.NW, Renton, stated that sidewalks are built for
A-Frame Signs pedestrians to use and not for advertising purposes,thus A-frame signs or any
other kind of signs do not belong on them.
CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing.
CAG: 98-016, Mazda&Ho+ Community Services Department submitted CAG-98-016, Demolition of the
Buildings Demolotion,Wyser Mazda and Holm Buildings; and requested approval of the project, authorization
Construction for final pay estimate in the amount of$1,505.63, commencement of 60-day lien
period, and release of retained amount of$16,316.32 to Wyser Construction Inc.,
contractor, if all required releases are obtained. Council concur.
CAG: 98-026,Ron Regis Park Community Services Department submitted CAG-98-026, Cedar River Regional
Construction,Bargmann Ron Regis)Park Grading, Paving and Ballfield Construction project; and
Excavation requested approval of the project, authorization for final pay estimate in the
amount of$107,161.76, commencement of 60-day lien period, and release of
retained amount of$61,564.26 to Bargmann Excavation,Inc., contractor,if all
required releases are obtained. Council concur.
CAG: 98-160,Renton Executive Department recommended approval of Amendment#2 to CAG-98-
Reporter Contract to Publish} 160, contract with the Renton Reporter to publish CitySource,to retain the
CitySource I current format for CitySource as one full page in the first and third editions of
the Renton Reporter each month. Refer to Community Services Committee.
Vacation: Maplewood P1 SE Technical Services Division recommended approval of an ordinance amending
C',irection of Legal Ordinance No. 4611, relating to the vacation of a portion of Maplewood Pl. SE,
Description) to correct a scrivener's error in the legal description. Council concur. (See page
333 for ordinance.)
CAG: 98-051,NE 27th Wastewater Utility Division submitted CAG-98-051,NE 27th Street and
St/Aberdeen Ave NE Storm Aberdeen Ave.NE Storm Drainage Improvements and East Kennydale Sewer
Drainage Improvements and Interceptor project; and requested approval of the project, authorization for final
East Kennydale Sewer pay estimate in the amount of$17,267.40,commencement of 60-day lien period,
Interceptor Project, Gary and release of retained amount of$109,427.06 to Gary Merlin Construction
Merlino Construction Co Co., Inc., contractor, if all required releases are obtained. Council concur.
MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL APPROVE
THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED.
OLD BUSINESS Community Services Committee Vice Chair Keolker-Wheeler presented a report
Community Services recommending concurrence in the following Mayor's appointments to the
Committee I Municipal Arts Commission:
Appointment: Municipal Arts
Catherine Mosher to fill an unexpired three-year term which expires onCommission
12/31/2001 (replacing Bob Dunn);
Jerri Everett to fill an unexpired three-year term which expires on 12/31/1999
replacing Rebecca Lloyd); and
Ned Mueller to fill an unexpired three-year term which expires on 12/31/2000
replacing Diana Manning).
MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECOE DED BY SCHLITZER,
COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMI I"1'bE REPORT. CARRIED.
Planning&Development Planning&Development Committee Chair Keolker-Wheeler presented a report
Committee recommending the following actions on the 1999 Comprehensive Plan
AGENDA
RENTON CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
September 27, 1999
Monday, 7:30 p.m.
1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
3. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 20, 1999
4. SPECIAL PRESENTATION: "My Boss is a Patriot" Award
5. PUBLIC MEETING: Knight Annexation 10% of Intent to Annex Petition; 46 acres located between
144th and 148th Avenues SE, from the city limits south to SE 132nd Street, and
between 146th and 148th Avenues SE, from SE 132nd Street to SE 136th Street;
also including two lots north of SE 129th Street and west of 144th Avenue SE)
6. PT TBLIC HEARING: A-Frame Signs
7. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
8. AJDIENCE COMMENT (Speakers must sign up prior to the Council meeting. Each speaker is
allowed five minutes. The comment period will be limited to one-half hour. The second audience
comment period later on in the agenda is unlimited in duration.)
When you are recognized by the Presiding Officer, please walk to the podium and state your name and
aauress for the record, SPELLING YOUR LAST NAME.
9. CONSENT AGENDA
The following items are distributed to Council members in advance for study and review, and the
recommended actions will be accepted in a single motion. Any item may be removed for further
discussion if requested by a Council member.
a. Community Services Department submits CAG-98-016, Demolition of the Mazda and Holm
Buildings; and requests approval of the project, authorization for final pay estimate in the amount of
1,505.63, commencement of 60-day lien period, and release of retained amount of$16,316.32 to
Wyser Construction Inc., contractor, if all required releases are obtained. Council concur.
b. Community Services Department submits CAG-98-026, Cedar River Regional (Ron Regis)Park
Grading, Paving and Ballfield Construction project; and requests approval of the project,
authorization for final pay estimate in the amount of$107,161.76, commencement of 60-day lien
period, and release of retained amount of$61,564.26 to Borgmann Excavation, Inc., contractor, if
all required releases are obtained. Council concur.
c. Executive Department recommends approval of Amendment#2 to C t -98-160, contract with the
Renton Reporter to publish CitySource, to retain the current format for CitySource as one full page
in the first and third editions of the Renton Reporter each month. Refer to Community Services
Committee.
d. Technical Services Division recommends approval of an ordinance amending Ord. #4611, relating to
the vacation of a portion of Maplewood Pl. SE, to correct a scrivener's error in the legal description.
Council concur. (See agenda item 12. for ordinance.)
e. Wastewater Utility Division submits CAG-98-051, NE 27th Street and Aberdeen Ave. NE Storm
Drainage Improvements and East Kennydale Sewer Interceptor project; and requests approval of the
project, authorization for final pay estimate in the amount of$17,267.40, commencement of 60-day
lien period, and release of retained amount of$109,427.06 to Gary Merlino Construction Co.,
contractor, if all required releases are obtained. Council concur.
CONTINUED ON REVERSE SIDE)
10. CORRESPONDENCE
11. OLD BUSINESS
Topics listed below were discussed in Council committees during the past week. Those topics marked
with an asterisk(*)may include legislation. Committee reports on any topics may be held by the
chairman if further review is necessary.
a. Community Services Committee: Municipal Arts Commission appointments
b. Finance Committee: Vouchers
c. Public Safety Committee: Emergency Management Plan
d. Transportation Committee: Benson Rd. S. pedestrian walkway project (budget increase)
12. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
Ordinance for first reading: Correcting the legal description for the Maplewood Pl. SE street vacation
see 9.d.)
13. NEW BUSINESS (Includes Council Committee agenda topics; call 425-430-6512 for recorded
information)
14. AUDIENCE COMMENT
15. ADJOURNMENT
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING
AGENDA
Preceding Council Meeting)
CANCELLED*
Hearing assistance devices for use in the Council Chambers are available upon request to the City Clerk •
Review Team
Recommendations
4' krttrYlli
411111111
s.
dui Idii
II faCaCIC
o
A-Fre
Gvrb 7 Sfc N
4-11-4
r
i MINIMUM
FONT-OWN slGF1444-/C
TYPICA-1,-Y 8 I
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 22, 1999
TO: King Parker, President
City Council Members
VIA:Mayor Tanner
FROM: Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator 6
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
STAFF CONTACT Laureen Nicolay, Senior Planner
Development Services Division, x-7294
SUBJECT: A-Frame Sign Regulations within the City Center and
Rescission of Existing Sign Code Enforcement
Moratorium (Resolution #3327)
ISSUE:
Sign regulation amendments to allow"on-premise", portable A-Frame signage for
business use (other than real estate directional signs).
I
RECOMMENDATION:
Consider public testimony at the September 27th public hearing on the issue of A-
Frame signage discuss outstanding issues and possible solutions and refer the
issue back to Planning and Development Committee for final evaluation and
recommendation.
BACKGROUND SUMMARY:
Existing Sign Code Provisions: Current City sign regulations prohibit portable, off-
premise signs and most signage on public right of way City-wide.
A-Frame" signs refined: A-Frame signs are also referred to as "sandwich board"
signs or"A-board" signs. A possible definition for these signs is as follows: A non-
illuminated type of portable sign comprised of hinged panels configured in the shape of
the alphabetic lette l"A". These signs contact the ground but not are •'ot anchored to the
ground and are independent of any other structure.
History and Enforcement Moratorium: The issue of A-Frame'signage was originally
referred by Courl>cil to Planning and Development Committee after the issue was raised
at a Council meeting. In May of last year, the Council passed Resolution#3327,
prohibiting enfor:ement of the A-Frame sign restrictions pending further study of the
issue.
Review Team Formed: At Council request, the Development Services Division formed
a twelve membe' sign code review team comprised of local business owners (including
a sign company) and interested citizens to review the issue of portable A-Frame
signage..
Review of Sign Codes of other Jurisdictions: The Sign Code Review Team met
numerous times, reviewed sign regulations from other jurisdictions, and inspected the
existing A-Frame signs within the downtown area. Of the 22 local governments we
contacted (Bellevue, Bothell, Edmonds, Everett, Federal Way, Issaquah, King County,
Kirkland, Lynnwood, Monroe, Mukilteo, Oak Harbor, Redmond, Seattle, Sea-Tac,
Shelton, Spokane, Sumner, Tacoma, Tukwilla, and Vancouver, only Sumner permits
these signs for businesses other than real estate. We also contacted 8 out of state cities
we thought might allow such signs due to the pedestrian nature of those communities'
downtowns: Mesa, Phoenix, and Tucson, Arizona; Pasadena, Santa Barbara, Berkeley,
and Palm Desert California; and San Antonio, Texas. Only Tucson permitted A-Frame
signs on a "permanent" basis. The City of Berkeley also permits tl-:e .n to be displayed
two weekends a ear and on holidays.
REVIEW TEAM RECOMMENDATIONS:
The Team did not achieve full consensus on all issues, but the majority of members
concurred with the following changes to the sign code:
Review Team Recommendation—Allow in Downtown Only: With the exception of
one Team member, a strong advocate of continued prohibitions against"A-frame"
signage due to safety and accessibility concerns, the majority of the team members
concurred to recommend that A-Frame signs be permitted only in the downtown sign
regulation area and only abutting the business to which the sign relates. The Team felt
that permitting A-Frame signs in the downtown area was warranted due to the
pedestrian nature of the area, the City's emphasis on downtown investment, and the
unique concentration of retail businesses in that area. Exhibit A, attached, depicts the
City Center Sign Regulation Area. (See further discussion regarding allowing these signs
outside of the downtown area on pages 5 and 6).
S
Team Recommended Number, Size, and Location of A-Frame Signs: The majority
of team members also concurred to recommend that Council permit only standardized
signs of a certain size limited to one per business per street frontage. The Team wished
to ensure that only sturdy, attractive, wind resistant and professionally produced signs
would be permitted. The specific recommendations of the majority of the Review Team
were as follows:
Number: Only one of these signs should be permitted per business per
street frontage. (See further discussion on page 6 for signs outside of the
downtown area)
Size: The sign must be exactly 32"wide and 36"tall. (See further discussion
of sign size on page 5).
2
Pedestrian Safety and Accessibility Issues: Sidewalk widths in the downtown vary
from 8 to eleven 11 feet in width. In other commercial areas of the,City, sidewalks are
typically 5 feet in width. Any sign code amendments to permit portable signs should
include the following provisions to reduce the potential for pedestrian passage impacts:
Location: Signs must be placed against the building and business to which
the sign relates.
Pedestrian Clearance: A minimum of 4' of unobstructed sidewalk area
between the outer edge of the sign and the street curb is required.
Clear Vision Area: Any regulations adopted should ensure that driver
visibility is not impaired near intersections, including pri'!-ite driveways.
Insurance Requirements/City Liability: The Team concurred that insurance should be
required for signs'on public right-of-way. No changes are needed since the current sign
code regulations require that the sign owner provide insurance with the City named as
an additional insued. The specific regulations are as follows:
Liability Insurance: Excluding wall signs projecting twelve inches (12") or less
over a public right-of-way, the owner of any sign projecting over a public right-of-
way shall ¶ile with the Building Official a.public liability insurance policy issued by
an insurance company authorized to do business in the State of Washington,
appropriately conditioned in conformity._with the objectives of this section, with
limits of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00) to three hundred thousand
dollars ($300,000.00) public liability coverage and fifty thousand dollars
50,000.00) property damage coverage. The City shall be named as an
additional insured, and notified of lapses or changes to the insurance policy.
Annual Permit Required for Signs Over Public Property:An annual sign
permit shall be required for any signs projecting over the right-of-way, excluding
wall signs projecting twelve inches (12") or less. Annual fees shall be consistent
with RMC 4-1-140M. The annual permit shall be issued upon a determination
that liability insurance remains in effect, and that the sign and supporting
structure are secure. (Ord. 4720, 5-4-1998) Note: There is currently no annual
fee amount established by the Code, however.
Sign Maintenance: The Team wanted to ensure that A-Frame signs were properly
maintained. No changes are needed to ensure maintenance since the current sign code
has provisions requiring the maintenance of signs. The following language is already in
the sign code:
Sign Maintenance Required: All signs, together with all of their supports,
braces, gtivs and anchors, shall be kept in repair and in proper state of
preservation. The surfaces of all signs shall be kept neatly painted or posted at
all times. The ground area shall be neat and orderly. (Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983)
Appearance of Signs: If a sign is visible from more than one direction, all areas
not intended as display surfaces including the back and sides shall be designed
so that such areas are given a finished and pleasing appearance with the display
surfaces visible only from the directions that they are intended to be seen. (Ord.
2504, 9-23-1969)
3
Administration: I the Council decides to permit A-Frame signs, the Team, with
concurrence by Ci y sign code enforcement staff, recommended that a sign permit be
required for each A-Frame sign ($100.00 fee). Also the permit number would be
required to be noted on the sign for efficiency in enforcement. The Development
Services Division' code compliance officer would be charged with enforcing the new A-
Frame regulations if new regulations are adopted and the moratorium is lifted. The
review team recommended that the Council reconsider the new regulations again after a
one-year.period. Development Services staff would track the one year time period and
prepare a report including the number of sign code violations and administration time for .
presentation to the Council at that time.
Violations of Sign Code: The Review Team expressed concern that any new
regulations be effectively enforced. No changes are needed to ensure compliance since
the current code already provides for removal of illegal signage by the code enforcement
officer and establishes penalties for sign code violations. However, additional staff time
will be required to administer(plan review, permit issuance, explaining provisions, etc.)
and enforce the sign code should the Council determine to permit A-Frame signs. The
current regulations state:
Penalties: Penalties for any violation of any of the provisions of this Chapter
shall be in accord with RMC 1-3-2, Civil Penalties. (Ord. 4351, 5-4-1992) (This
Section allows fines of$100.00 to$500.00 dollars per day depending on the
length of time the violation continues]
Removal and Storage of Illegal Signs Authorized: Unauthu,ized signs or other
advertising devices either wholly or partially supported on or projecting over the
public righlt-of-way may be removed by the Building Official or his representative
without notice to the owner. Such signs or devices shall be stored at the City
garage fori a period not to exceed thirty (30) days, during which time the owner
may redeem such sign or device by payment to the City Treasurer an amount
equal to the City cost for the removal and storage, but in no event shall the fee
be less than twenty dollars ($20.00). After expiration of the thirty (30) day storage
period, the sign not having been redeemed, it shall be destroyed or otherwise
disposed of. (Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983, Amd. Ord. 4422, 10-25-1993)
Confiscated Signs: All confiscated signs shall become the property of the City.
Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983)
4
i
SPECIFIC A-FRAME SIGN ISSUES FOR FURTHER COUNCIL DISCUSSION:
The following issue's either came up subsequent to the final Review Team meeting or
were issues where team consensus could not be reached. A bulleted list of discussion
items is attached as Exhibit B.
Size of signs: The Sign Code Review Team recommended that in order to be eligible
for a sign permit, an A-Frame sign must be exactly 32" inches wide by 36" tall. Members
felt this larger size Hof sign would be more wind resistant. A sign company representative
subsequently noted that a sign size of 24" by 30" could be more cc;t effective for
businesses since this would allow full utilization of a standard 4 by o sheet of plywood.
Council may also wish to consider permitting a range of sign sizes (e.g. 24" by 30" up to
32 by 36") in order to allow for specific site conditions. For example, if only 32"wide by
36" tall signs are permitted, a business building abutting a 6-foot wide sidewalk would
not be able to put up any A-Frame signage since such a wide sign would project into the
required 4-foot clear pedestrian area. Two sign sizes will be displayed at the public
hearing (24"wide by 30"tall and 32"wide by 36" tall).
Construction Specifications and Materials: The Team agreed that the materials used
to construct the signs needed to be durable. Team members differed, however, in the
materials recommended. The material suggested by the sign company owner was %"
MDO plywood [a heavy pressed particleboard] with the edges protected with plastic
edge cap or plastic molding. Another team member will present information at the public
hearing supporting an alternative construction material, a composition material
incorporating plastic, which may be more durable than the particle board.
Design of Signs: Code enforcement staff note that if the Council wishes to prevent the
potential for a business to install an unstable A-Frame sign with long legs, a minimum
sign face size may also need to be stipulated in addition to overall maximum sign
dimension (e.g. approximately 4" less than the overall sign dimensions).
Removal of Signs Upon Closure in Evenings/Weekends: The majority of review
team members concurred in recommending a requirement that these signs be
removed in the evenings and/or weekends a business is closed. Members felt that this
would reduce vandalism potential to the signs. However, a team member has requested
that Council consider allowing these signs to remain in place in the evenings due to the
difficulty in placing/removing the sign on a daily basis.
Insurance/Liability/Annual Permit Requirements: The current code requires an
annual sign permit for signs over public right-of-way and proof of insurance with the City
of Renton named as an additional insured. The Sign Code Review Team was aware of
and supportive of the insurance requirement, but may not have been apprised of the
current code's requirement for an annual permit. The primary purpose of the annual
permit is to verify proof of insurance. No annual permit fee was discussed with the
Team. Staff recommends that the annual fee of$75.00 to $100.00 be established to
cover the costs of administering the insurance requirements and inspection the sign
appearance and maintenance.
Allowing A-Frame Signage for Businesses throughout the City: Staff has been
unable to resolve a request by a team member that the City consider some means to
permit A-Frame signs on a limited basis for shopping center`tenants and other business
buildings located outside of the downtown area which are set back a significant distance
from the street.
Shopping Centers are considered to be any building with 4 or more tenants or any group of buildings,
according to the definition section of the Development Regulations.
5
Team Member Request that Council Consider Permitting A-Frames City Wide for
Shopping Centers and/or All Businesses (continued):
Equity: After considering numerous options, staff could not create permissive
language which would equitably permit these signs for shopping center tenants
and other buildings constructed a distance from the street without permitting
them essentially everywhere in the City. If the Council chooses to permit A-
Frame signs throughout the City, the number of signs each business can
display could be limited similar to the requirements considered for the
downtown. Commercial areas outside the City center have additional location
possibilities. Should the Council wish, A-Frame signs could also be permitted
to be located in (or partially within) a landscaping strip--as well as on the public
sidewalk and adjacent to the business building. Potential could exist for
damage or extensive pruning of landscaping should this option be selected.
Sign Proliferation: If approved, this would likely result in a significant increase
in signage throughout the City. For example, in the case of a shopping center
on the comer of Rainier Avenue South and Airport Way, this center contains six
businesses and at least two street frontages. In this case each business could
put an A-Frame sign on Rainier Avenue and Airport Way resulting in 6 of these
signs placed on the sidewalk within a distance of approximately 100 feet along
Rainier Avenue and 6 signs within a distance of 300 feet along Airport Way.
Variances not Viable Option: A variance or modification process to allow
these signs for only some businesses was unworkable since there would no
legally defensible means to allow some and not others thrc"igh the variance
process. The modification process was also rejected as a . option to attempt to
limit these signs since it would ultimately allow approval of the same number of
signs as o tright allowing them, but would just add another permit process for
an applicant to go through.
CONCLUSION OF MAJORITY OF SIGN CODE REVIEW TEAM:
The majority of the Sign Code Review Team concluded that the proposed regulations
would permit more effective advertising in the pedestrian-oriented City Center without
substantially compromising pedestrian mobility and safety. If approved by Council, the
design and construction standards should ensure these signs have a uniform and
attractive appearance. Sign maintenance requirements will ensure they remain
attractive during the one-year trial period. The Council should review the impact and
effectiveness in one year's time to ensure the regulations are functioning as intended.
In summary, the issue before the Council is whether or not to permit A-Frame signage.
And, if Council elects to permit such signs, whether to permit them City-wide or just in
the pedestrian-oriented City Center Sign Regulation Area (downtown).
Attachments Exhibit A, City Center Sign Regulation Area Map
Exhibit B, Bulleted list of discussion points (colored paper)
Exhibit C, Public handout summarizing issues (duplicates information
contained in this issue paper)
6
EXU11T A4-4-100H
3. Map of CITY CENTER SIGN REGULATION BOUNDARIES:
Rental Pluricipal Iteport
I
1.1/477j3.1.L.L. I ( I 1* 4 - Oa t ..---- *--
1.:.= I,I i=
3;.1116 —im om
N led
MIE;E- mr.
ill I al-illaRil,e,I,Airport Way I i j % 4 III MIMI NM,
1 ! 1 ‘
i I %
I f --r----i
i---- OM=
171 ---\
11111
ta s'
F-
3—' ' ‘‘
X 'it I_ _____
L_t— 1111111'
i 116:,.%`. ,.,‘S end St MIN. —.1 51 i_ ,
nd t
r...„.,1.-------, — I 1 —I I 1.1• ell
MI 1111101111 ,,bLy..,__---:-..:,..._ ,.... .......
ill im
sl 4064' 4
t I 1 Ea 11S-;-_,-- w... •
an e
I S 3rd t
S • t1iI111HII11I - iwippp 4.44 L., ,• .
4' 7-*1 _ITA5:—51
4.-----"--
T—
I $ 4th 1sdithsts_tut st
i
dj. ;N\ mi=';MI Lir E Fr
f in Eil 111 !MN=I pi- mu NM IINNI MN
Mill
INN MI i I
4 gm mum Is•4 Is. ,..1..— ..... ...4111:j Mil, 12=
g1-.. • -...''.-
1 II11 3 1 “•).:1,____._,” -: _ ,.•
ssms,
si.; '1— —i
r-- . 1 • I V I.I --=I 1 :r-=,,-5 11;=_ 7 1 1 I(._ ____,.46 al i • -
Ord. 4720, 5-4-1998)
Re.visedi/99) 4-50 _ _. -
EXHIBIT B
SI?ECIFIC A-FRAME SIGN ISSUES FOR
FURTHER COUNCIL DISCUSSION:
1. Should businesses be allowed "on-premise" portable A-Frame signs for
advertising purposes?
Option A—Yes, the City should permit them, but revisit the issue in one year.
Option B—No (If Option B is selected, the remainder of ite; S are no longer
relevant)
2. If allowed, should such signs be limited to the City Center Sign Regulation Area
or Permitted Citywide?
Option A—Allow in City Center only
Option B—Allow Citywide
3. What should be the allowed size of signs?
Option A—All signs must be exactly 32" inches wide by 36" inches tall.
Option B—Allow a range of sign sizes from 24" by 30" to 32" by 36"
Option C—Another sign size(s) of should be permitted
4. What should the signs be made of?
Option A-1/2" MDO plywood[pressed particleboard]should be used .
Option B—The composite material recommended by Beverly Franklin should be
used.
Option C—The following other material(s) should be used:
Option D—Stipulate only that the signs must be constructed of"durable" material
and kept in good repair(poorly maintained signs may be removed by the City).
5. Should the signs be allowed to have varying "leg" length?
Option A—Require a minimum sign face area thereby eliminating potential for
signs with long supporting "legs".
Option B—Have no restrictions regarding sign face size.
6. Should signs be removed on a daily basis when the business is not open?
Option A—Yes, signs should be removed.
Option B—No, signs should be allowed to remain
7. What should the annual fee be for ensuring sign maintenance and verification
of insurance for signs on City right of way:
Option A—A fee based on actual administrative costs (preliminary estimate is
75.00 to $100.00).
Option B—Other fee of$
Option C—No fee.
Page 1 of 2
ADDITIONAL ISSUES TO
DISCUSS IF A-FRAME SIGNS ARE PERMITTED
OUTSIDE OF THE CITY CENTER SIGN AREA:
8. If the Council determines to permit these signs Citywide, how many sigi
should each business be allowed?
Option A—One sign per business per street frontage limited to a maximum
two signs per business (while most businesses would be limited to one sign, tt
could allow 2 signs for tenants of most shopping centers and for businesses w
corner lots).
Option B—Two signs per business. (This would allow all businesses the sar
number of signs regardless of the number of abutting streets).
Option C—Other
9. For signs outside the City Center Sign Regulation Area (downtown), whe
should these signs be located?
Option A—Allow signs:
Abutting the business building, and
On the public sidewalk abutting the business lot, and
Within the landscaping strip abutting the business lot.
Option B—Allow signs:
Abutting the business building, and
On the public sidewalk.
Option C—Other
Page 2 o
EXHIBIT C
SEPTEMBER 27, 1999 PUBLIC HEARING
ON PORTABLE A-FRAME SIGNGAGE.
Tonight the Council will take public testimony regarding the issue of A-Frame (Sandwich
Board) signage. The Council is considering whether to amend the existing sign
regulations to allow"on-premise", portable A-Frame signage for business use (other
than real estate directional signs, which are already allowed). In adc':: on to taking public
testimony, the Co 6 ncil will discuss outstanding issues and possible solutions.
BACKGROUND SUMMARY:
Existing Sign Code Provisions:. Current City sign regulations prohibit portable, off-
premise signs and most signage on public right of way City-wide.
A-Frame" signs defined: A-Frame signs are also referred to as "sandwich board"
signs or"A-board'] signs. A possible definition for these signs is as follows: A non-
illuminated type of portable sign comprised of hinged panels configured in the shape of
the alphabetic letter"A". These signs contact the ground but not are not anchored to the
ground and are independent of any other structure.
History and Enforcement Moratorium: The issue of A-Frame signage was originally
referred by Council to Planning and Development Committee after the issue was raised
at a Council meeting. In May of last year, the Council passed Resolution#3327,
prohibiting enforcement of the A-Frame sign restrictions pending f',i her study of the
issue.
Review Team Formed: At Council request, the Development Services Division formed
a twelve member sign code review team comprised of local business owners (including
a sign company) and interested citizens,to review the issue of portable A-Frame
signage.
Review of Sign Codes of other Jurisdictions: The Sign Code Review Team met
numerous times, reviewed sign regulations from other jurisdictions, and inspected the
existing A-Frame signs within the downtown area. Of the 22 local governments we
contacted (Bellevue; Bothell, Edmonds, Everett, Federal Way, Issaquah, King County,
Kirkland, Lynnwood, Monroe, Mukilteo, Oak Harbor, Redmond, Seattle, Sea-Tac,
Shelton, Spokane, Sumner, Tacoma, Tukwilla, and Vancouver, only Sumner permits
these signs for businesses other than real estate. We also contacted 8 out of state cities
we thought might allow such signs due to the pedestrian nature of those communities'
downtowns: Mesa, Phoenix, and Tucson, Arizona; Pasadena, Santa Barbara, Berkeley,
and Palm Desert, California; and San Antonio, Texas. Only Tucson permitted A-Frame
signs on a "perManent" basis. The City of Berkeley also permits them to be displayed
two weekends a year and on holidays.
Page 1 of 6
REVIEW TEAM RECOMMENDATIONS:
The Team did not achieve full consensus on all issues, but the majority of members
concurred with the following changes to the sign code:
Review Team Recommendation—Allow in Downtown Only: With the exception of
one Team member, a strong advocate of continued prohibitions against"A-frame"
signage due to safety and accessibility concerns, the majority of the team members
concurred to recommend that A-Frame signs be permitted only in the downtown sign
regulation area and only abutting the business to which the sign relates. The Team felt
that permitting A-Frame signs in the downtown area was warranted L:.,a to the
pedestrian nature of the area, the City's emphasis on downtown investment, and the
unique concentration of retail businesses in that area. Exhibit A, attached, depicts the
City Center Sign Regulation Area. (See further discussion regarding allowing these signs
outside of the downtown area on page 5).
Team Recommended Number, Size, and Location of A-Frame Signs: The majority
of team members also concurred to recommend that Council permit only standardized
signs of a certain size limited to one per business per street frontage. The Team wished
to ensure that only sturdy, attractive, wind resistant and professionally produced signs
would be permitted. The specific recommendations of the majority of the Review Team
were as follows:
Number: Only one of these signs should be permitted per business per street
frontage. (See further discussion on page 5 for signs outside of the downtown.area)
Size: The sign must be exactly 32"wide and 36"tall., (See further discussion of sign
size on page 4).
t,
r
Pedestrian Safety and Accessibility Issues: Sidewalk widths in the downtown vary
from 8 to eleven 11 feet in width. In other commercial areas of the City, sidewalks are
typically 5 feet in width. Any sign code amendments to permit portable signs should
include the following provisions to reduce the potential for pedestrian passage impacts:
Location: Signs must be placed against the building and business to which the sign
relates.
Pedestrian Clearance: A minimum of 4' of unobstructed sidewalk area between the
outer edge of the sign and the street curb is required.
Clear Vision Area: Any regulations adopted should ensure that driver visibility is not
impaired near intersections, including private driveways.
Insurance Req Liiirements/City Liability: The Team concurred that insurance should be
required for signs on public right-of-way. No changes are needed since the current sign
code regulations require that the sign owner provide insurance with the City named as
an additional insured. The specific regulations are as follows:
Liability Insurance: Excluding wall signs projecting twelve inches (12") or less
over a public right-of-way, the owner of any sign projecting over a public right-of-
way shall file with the Building Official a public liability insurance policy issued by
an insurance company authorized to do business in the State of Washington,
Page 2 of 6
1
appropriately conditioned in conformity with the objectives of this section, with
limits of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00) to three hundred thousand
dollars ($300,000.00) public liability coverage and fifty thousand dollars
50,000.09) property damage coverage. The City shall be named as an
additional insured, and notified of lapses or changes to the insurance policy.
Annual Permit Required for Signs Over Public Property: An annual sign
permit shall be required for any signs projecting over the right-of-way, excluding
wall signs projecting twelve inches (12") or less. Annual fees shall be consistent
with RMC 4i 1-140M. The annual permit shall be issued upon a determination
that liability insurance remains in effect, and that the sign and supporting
structure are secure. (Ord. 4720, 5-4-1998) Note: There is currently no annual
fee amount established by the Code, however.
Sign Maintenances: The Team wanted to ensure that A-Frame signs were properly
maintained. No changes are needed to ensure maintenance since Tie current sign code
has provisions requiring the maintenance of signs. The following language is already in
the sign code:
Sign Maintenance Required: All signs, together with all of t -.ir supports,
braces, guys and anchors, shall be kept in repair and in proper state of
preservation. The surfaces of all signs shall be kept neatly painted or posted at
all times. The ground area shall be neat and orderly. (Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983)
Appearance of Signs: If a sign is visible from more than one direction, all areas
not intended as display surfaces including the back and sides shall be designed
so that such areas are given a finished and pleasing appearance with the display
surfaces visible only from the directions that they are intended to be seen. (Ord.
2504, 9-23-'1969)
Administration: If the Council decides to permit A-Frame signs, the Team, with
concurrence by City sign code enforcement staff, recommended that a sign permit be
required for each Al-Frame sign ($100.00 fee). Also the permit number would be
required to be noted on the sign for efficiency in enforcement. The Development
Services Division's code compliance officer would be charged with enforcing the new A-
Frame regulations if new regulations are adopted and the moratorium is lifted. The
review team recommended that the Council reconsider the new regulations again after a
one-year period. Development Services staff would track the one year time period and
prepare a report including the number of sign code violations and administration time for
presentation to the Council at that time.
Violations of Sign Code: The Review Team expressed concern that any new
regulations be effectively enforced. No changes are needed to ensure compliance since
the current code al heady provides for removal of illegal signage by the code enforcement
officer and establishes penalties for sign code violations. However, additional staff time
will be required to administer(plan review, permit issuance, explaining provisions, etc.)
and enforce the sign code should the Council determine to permit A-Frame signs. The
current regulations state:
Page 3 of 6
Penalties: Penalties for any violation of any of the provisions of this Chapter
shall be in accord with RMC 1-3-2, Civil Penalties. (Ord. 4351, 5-4-1992) [This
Section al ows fines of$100.00 to$500.00 dollars per day depending on the
length of ti a the violation continues]
Removal nd Storage of Illegal Signs Authorized: Unauthorized signs or other
advertisin devices either wholly or partially supported on or projecting over the
public righof-way may be removed by the Building Official o-his representative
without notice to the owner. Such signs or devices shall be stored at the City
garage fo d a period not to exceed thirty (30) days, during which time the owner
may redeem such sign or device by payment to the City Treasurer an amount
equal to the City cost for the removal and storage, but in no event shall the fee
be less than twenty dollars ($20.00). After expiration of the thirty (30) day storage
period, the sign not having been redeemed, it shall be destroyed or otherwise
disposed of. (Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983, Amd. Ord. 4422, 10-25-1993)
Confiscated Signs: All confiscated signs shall become the property of the City.
Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983)
SPECIFIC A-FRAME SIGN ISSUES FOR FURTHER COUNCIL DISCUSSION:
The following issues either came up subsequent to the final Review Team meeting or
were issues where team consensus could not be reached. A bulleted list of discussion
items is attached as Exhibit B.
Size of signs: The Sign Code Review Team recommended that in .)rder to be eligible
for a sign permit, an A-Frame sign must be exactly 32" inches wide o,36" tall. Members
felt this larger size of sign would be more wind resistant. A sign company representative
subsequently noted that a sign size of 24" by 30" could be more cost effective for
businesses since this would allow full utilization of a standard 4 by 8 sheet of plywood.
Council may also wish to consider permitting a range of sign sizes (e.g. 24" by 30" up to
32 by 36") in order to allow for specific site conditions. For example, if only 32"wide by
36" tall signs are permitted, a business building abutting a 6-foot wide sidewalk would
not be able to put up any A-Frame signage since such a wide sign would project into the
required 4-foot clear pedestrian area. Two sign sizes will be displayed at the public
hearing (24"wide by 30" tall and 32"wide by 36"tall).
Construction Specifications and Materials: The Team agreed that the materials used
to construct the signs needed to be durable. Team members differed, however, in the
materials recommended. The material suggested by the sign company owner was %"
MDO plywood [a heavy pressed particleboard]with the edges protected with plastic
edge cap or plastic molding. Another team member will present information at the public
hearing supporting an alternative construction material, a composition material
incorporating plastic, which may be more durable than the particle board.
Design of Signs: Code enforcement staff note that if the Council wishes to prevent the
potential for a business to install an unstable A-Frame sign with long legs, a minimum
sign face size may also need to be stipulated in addition to overall maximum sign
dimension (e.g. approximately 4" less than the overall sign dimensions).
Page 4 of 6
Removal of Signs Upon Closure in Evenings/Weekends: The majority of review
team members concurred in recommending a requirement that these signs be
removed in the evenings and/or weekends a business is closed. Members felt that this
would reduce vandalism potential to the signs. However, a team member has requested
that Council consider allowing these signs to remain in place in the evenings due to the
difficulty in placing/removing the sign on a daily basis.
Insurance/Liability/Annual Permit Requirements: The current code requires an
annual sign permit for signs over public right-of-way and proof of insurance with the City
of Renton named as an additional insured. The Sign Code Review Team was aware of
and supportive of the insurance requirement, but may not have been apprised of the
current code's requirement for an annual permit. The primary purpose of the annual
permit is to verify proof of insurance. No annual permit fee was discussed with the
Team. Staff recommends that the annual fee of$75.00 to $100.0 J :e established to
cover the costs of administering the insurance requirements and inspection the sign
appearance and
maintenance.
Allowing A-Frame Signage for Businesses throughout the City: staff has been
unable to resolve a request by a team member that the City consider some means to
permit A-Frame signs on a limited basis for shopping center*tenants and other business
buildings located outside of the downtown area which are set back a significant distance
from the street.
Shopping Centers are considered to be any building with 4 or more tenants or any group of buildings,
according to the definition section of the Development.Regulations.
Team Member Request that Council Consider Permitting A-Frames City Wide for
Shopping Centers and/or All Businesses (continued):
Equity: After considering numerous options, staff could not create permissive
language which would equitably permit these signs for shopping center tenants
and other buildings constructed a distance from the street without permitting
them essentially everywhere in the City. If the Council chooses to permit A-
Frame signs throughout the City, the number of signs each business can
display could be limited similar to the requirements considered for the
downtown. Commercial areas outside the City center have additional location
possibilities. Should the Council wish, A-Frame signs could also be permitted
to be located in (or partially within) a landscaping strip--as well as on the public
sidewalk and adjacent to the business building. Potential could exist for
damage or extensive pruning of landscaping should this option be selected.
Sign Proliferation: If approved, this would likely result in a significant increase
in signage throughout the City. For example, in the case of a shopping center
on the comer of Rainier Avenue South and Airport Way, this center contains six
businesses and at least two street frontages. In this case each business could
put an A-Frame sign on Rainier Avenue and Airport Way resulting in 6 of these
signs placed on the sidewalk within a distance of approximately 100 feet along
Rainier venue and 6 signs within a distance of 300 feet along Airport Way.
Page 5 of 6
Variances not Viable Option: A variance or modification process to allow
these sign for only some businesses was unworkable sinc1 there would no
legally defensible means to allow some and not others through the variance
process. The modification process was also rejected as an option to attempt to
limit these signs since it would ultimately allow approval of the same number of
signs as outright allowing them, but would just add another 72'rrnit process for
an applicant to go through.
CONCLUSION OF MAJORITY OF SIGN CODE REVIEW TEAM:
The majority of the Sign Code Review Team concluded that the proposed regulations
would permit more effective advertising in the pedestrian-oriented City Center without
substantially compromising pedestrian mobility and safety. If approved by Council, the
design and construction standards should ensure these signs have a uniform and
attractive appearance. Sign maintenance requirements will ensure they remain
attractive during the one-year trial period. The Council should review the impact and
effectiveness in one year's time to ensure the regulations are functioning as intended.
In summary, the issue before the Council is whether or not to permit A-Frame signage.
And, if Council elects to permit such signs, whether to permit them City-wide or just in
the pedestrian-oriented City Center Sign Regulation Area (downtown).
Attachments Exhibit A, City Center Sign Regulation Area Map
Exhibit B, Bulleted list of discussion points
Page 6 of 6
dP
PROPOSED SIGN REGULATION AMENDMENTS lfr?.PERMITTING A-FRAME SIGNS WITHIN CITY CENTER SIGN REGULATION AREA
Changes indicated with underline and strike outs)
4-11-190S DEFINITIONS:
SIGN, TEMPORARY: Any sign, banner, pennant, valance or advertising display
constructed of cloth, canvas, light fabric, cardboard, wallboard or other light materials,
with or without framles, intended to be displayed for a limited period of time only. (Ord.
3719, 4-11-1983; Amd. Ord. 4577, 1-22-1996)
SIGN, PORTABLE: A sign which is not permanently affixed and designed for or
capable of movement, except for those signs explicitly designed for people to carry on
their persons or which are permanently affixed to motor vehicles. (Ord. 3719, 4-11-
1983; Amd. Ord. 4577, 1-22-1996)
Sign, A-Frame: A non-illuminated type of portable sign comprised of hinged
panels configured in the shape of the alphabetic letter"A". These signs contact
the ground but not are not anchored to the ground and are independent of any
other structure.
4-4-100C PROHIBITED SIGNS
4-4-10005. Portable Signs: Portable signs or any sign which is not permanently
mounted, except for those portable signs permitted by Section 4-4-100H8 within the
City Center Sign Regulation Area.
4-4-100C9. Signs on Public Right-of-Way: Signs on public right-of-way other than
signs allowed by subsection J of this Section, temporary signs, City sponsored signs,
and public servicel signs per subsections B6b, B6c and B6m of this Section and
Qor table signs permitted by Section 4-4-100H8 within the City Center Sign Regulation
Area. (Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983)
4-4-100C10. Off-Premises Signs: Except:
a. Temporary signs allowed by subsection J of this Section, City sponsored signs1-and
public service signs per subsections B6b, B6c and B6m of this Section, and
portable signs permitted by Section 4-4-100H8 within the City Center Sign
Regulation Area.. (Ord. 4172, 9-12-1988; Amd. Ord. 4629, 8-19-1996)
I
The following code section is likely obsolete since it has not be utilized within the past
ten years and is, jtherefore, proposed for deletion due the ambiguity of the wording.
d-Off-premises-adveftising-may-be-allowed as-an accessory use-ef an identification
sign of-othef-stcctufe-if-the follewi -eoAd+tions are met
i.the--maximum size-of-the off premises-advertising+s-six-(6) square
feed
ii--f\!o-fnofc than-twentyfive-percent-(25%)-of-he-principal-str-uctur-e-i-s
covered by the off pfem+ses a4vert-sing-sign-
iii. The-off-premises advertising sign is designed to be viewed by users
of the facility rather than street traffic. (Ord. 41,72, 9.122— 8)
H. SIGNS WITHIN CITY CENTER— SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS:
8. Temporary, Portable and /Special Permit Signs: In addition to the permanent
signs described in subsection H6b of this Section, the following signs are also allowed
subject to permit, maintenance and inspection requirements:
a. Temporary Signs: Ttemporary signs per subsection J of this Section...1—Ternpocacy
Signs, are also-allewe4:
b. Portable A-frame Signs: A-frame signs complying with all the following standards
may be permitted:
i. Location: Signs must be placed against the building and business to which
the sign relates.
0
ii. Pedestrian Clearance: A minimum of 4' of unobstructed sidewalk area
between the outer edge of the sign and the street curb is
required.
iii. Number: Only one of these signs is permitted per business per street
frontage.
iv Size: The sign must be 32"wide and 36" tall.
v. Construction Specifications and Materials:
Material:
Color:
design and color specifications to be determined by Council
vi. Maintenance and Appearance: Signs must be maintained in accordance
with the provisions of Section 4-4-100D3, Sign Maintenance
Required and Section 4-4-100D4, Appearance of Signs.
vii. Display of Permit Number: All A-Frame signs shall have the sign permit
number placed in the upper left-hand corner by the permittee.
No major code changes, other than broadening the scope of the authority section to
allow enforcement by the City's Code Enforcement Officer, are necessary to ensure A-
Frame enforcement and maintenance since existing Section 4-4-10084 currently
states:
Authority of Planning/Building/Public Works AdministratorBuilding Official:
The Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator Building Official-is hereby
authorized and directed to enforce all the provisions of this SectionCode. The
Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator Building-Official-may order the
removal of any sign that is not maintained in accordance with the provisions of-
subsection D3 of this Section. (Ord. 2877, 9-9-1974, Amd. Ord. 3719, 4-11-
1983)
Periodic Inspection of Signs: All signs controlled by this SectionCoce shall be
subject to inspection and periodic reinspection by the Planning/Building/Public
Works AdministratorBuilding Official. (Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983)
5
Codifier will need to reformat the following Section back into Table format since existing
Folio program is unable to properly reproduce table format.
4-4-140M SIGN PERMIT FEES:
3. TEMPORARY AND PORTABLE SIGNS:
Grand Opening Signs,
Banners, Streamers, etc. for
Businesses with Less than 5
Employees pursuant to RMC 4-4-100J5 $5.00
Grand Opening Signs, Banners,
Streamers, etc. for Businesses
with 5 or More Employees
pursuant to RMC 44-100J5 25.00
Political-Sign-s There shall.be no fcc for political-signs
Real Estate Directional Signs
on Public Right-of'Way 15.00 per sign for a 6 month period with a
renewal fee of$10.00 for a 3 month period
with only one renewal allowed
A-Frame Signs within the City
Center Sign Regulation Area 100.00 per sign
Other Temporary Signs
pursuant to RMC 4-4-100J6,
Temporary SignsSrs-Within City--Genter- $15.00 plus a deposit of-
100.00 which shall be forfeited
if the applicant fails to remove the
sign when the permit expires
Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983)
4. Request for Administrative Modifications of City Center Sign Regulations per
RMC 4-4-100H9: One hundred dollars ($100.00). (Ord. 4720, 5-4-1998)
Other related sign regulation housekeeping amendments: Delete the following
Sections and portions of sections which are contradictory and/or confusing when
combined with our with our prohibitions against portable and off-premise signage.
4-4-110-k9. Nonstructural Trim: Nonstructural trim and-per-table display-surfaces-may
be of wood, metal, approved plastics or any combination thereof.
4-1-14-60: PORTABLE- DISP-LAY SURFACE:A display surface tompor-a Fi ly-affixed-to-a
standardize4-aci-u-err-tising-st ure-which is-regularly-moved from structure to structure
at-periodic4nterval-s40 rd. 4577, 1- 22- 96)
6
041A P
EXHIBIT A
OP IONS FOR PERMITTING A-FRAME SIGNS OUTSIDE
THE CITY CENTER SIGN REGULATION AREA
Several options exist to permit these signs outside of the City Center Sign Regulation
Area; however, two of these options would likely permit more of these signs than the
sign code review team had envisioned:
Option 1: Amendj-existing regulations to permit for shopping center tenants
throughout the City. This could be equitably administered by existing staff, but would
result in an increase in these signs throughout the City.
Option 2: Amend the existing administrative sign code modification process of
Section 4-4-100H9 making it applicable to ALL sign code modification (a.k.a.
variance) requests. Currently these criteria only apply to modification requests within
the City Center Sign Regulation Area. To do so would mean that any sign code
variance" request would first be subject to these criteria in lieu of the standard
variance criteria. The criteria would allow staff to issue modifications to allow A-Frame
signs and other types of currently prohbited signs, and would likely result in a
proliferation of these and other currently prohibited signs throughout the City. This
would require extra staff time to administer and more submittal requirements for
applicants. (Draft attached as Exhibit B).
Option 3: A third option, is to keep the code as it is relative to A-Frame signs outside
of the Downtown. Presently signs which do not comply with the sign code may be
permitted only by lariance: Proposals to deviate from the restrictions against A-Frame
signage outside the downtown, would continue to be processed as a standard variance
request. Variance are by nature difficult to grant since each applicant is required to
show that a special and unique situation exists in order to obtain approval of a
variance. This would result in far fewer A-Frame sign permits outside the downtown
than Options 2 or 3, due to the stricter decision criteria and also due to the more
expensive application fee ($500.00). (Draft attached as Exhibit C)
7
4404
EXHIBIT B P
OPTION 2, MODIFICATION PROCESS AMENDMENTS
Eliminate existing Section 4-4-100H9, Modifications to City Center Sign Regulations.
Relocate entire Section to 4-4-100S and modify text as follows to change the review
process for sign code variances by permitting administrative modifications if an
applicant can satisfy certain criteria:
4-4-100S4 4 100H9, Modifications of City-Genter-Sign Regulations:
a. Authority and Purpose: The Development Services Director may grant a
modification from the sign standards for individual signs which do not meet the specific
provisions of the Gity-Genter sign standards when the proposed sign is intended to
accomplish one of the following purposes:
i. Respond to the needs of the public in locating a-business establishment; or
ii. Assist business in contributing to the economic well-being of the community;
or
iii. Install a sign that is considered to be historic or of historic value by the
advertising industry or a recognized historic preservation organization, provided
that such entity was not involved in the use, design or'production of the
proposed sign; or
iv. Result in a reduction of signs on a site; or
v. Result in a reduction in the number of freestanding or ground signs otherwise
allowed; or
vi. Result in a coordinated sign plan for a multi-tenant building or multiple
building complex.
b. Review Criteria: If the Development Services Director determines that the intent of
the proposed sign accomplishes one of the above purposes, the Development Services
Director may grant a modification request provided the proposed sign also meets all of
the following criteria:
i. The modification will not create a significant adverse impact'to other property
or improvements in the immediate vicinity of the subject property; and
ii. Except for requests involving A-Frame signage, tThe modification will not
increase the number of signs allowed by this Chapter or allow a type of sign
which is prohibited by this Chapter in subsection C of this Section; and
iii. The modification will not increase the allowed height or area of any wall,
projecting, awning/canopy/marquee/traditional marquee, or secondary sign by
more than twenty five percent (25%); and
8
iv. The modification will not increase the allowed height or area of any
freestanding or ground sign; and
v. The modification does not create a public safety hazard.
cd. Fees: Fees shall be as stipulated by RMC 4-1-140M4.
dG. Variance May Be Required: Proposals which do not meet the purposes or criteria
of subsections S149a and S149b of this Section shallmay be reviewed as variance
applications heard by the Board of Adjustment or Hearing Examiner as provided in
subsection R RMC 4-1-050D and RMC 4-1-050F and consistent with the provisions of
RMC 4-9-250B of this Section. (Ord. 4720, 5-4-1998)
r,
O
EXHIBIT C
3, 41AOPTIONRETAINEXISTINGVARIANCEPROCESS
Option 3. The following process and decision criteria already exist within our
current regulationh :
B. VARIANCE PROCEDURES:
1. Authority and Applicability:
a. Hearing Examiner Variances: The Hearing Examiner shall have the
authority to grant variances from the provisions of this Title where the proposed
development requires or required any permit or approval as set forth in RMC 4-
1-050H.
b. Board of Adjustment Variances: The Board of Adjustment shall have
authority to grant variances from the provisions of this Title upon application to
the Development Services Division where no approval or permit is required for
the proposed development which must be granted by the Hearing Examiner
pursuant to RMC 4-1-050H. The Board of Adjustment shall have no authority to
vary the terms or conditions of any permit, recommendation or decision issued
by the Hearing Examiner.
c. Administrative Variances: The Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator
or his/her designee shall have the authority to grant variances from the following
development standards when no other permit or approval requires Hearing
Examiner Review:
i. Residential Land Uses: Lot width, lot depth, setbacks, allowed
projections into setbacks, and lot coverage; and
ii. Commercial and Industrial Land Uses: Screening of surface
mounted equipment and screening of roof-mounted equipment.
2. Filing of Application: A property owner, or his duly authorized agent, may file an
application for a variance which application shall set forth fully the grounds therefor and
the facts deemed to justify the granting of such variance.
3. Submittal Requirements and Application Fees: Shall be as listed in RMC 4-8-
120C, Land Use Applications, and 4-1-170, Land Use Review Fees.
4. Public Notice and Comment Period: Notice of the application shall-be given
pursuant to RMC 4-8-090, Public Notice Requirements.
5. Decision Criteria: The Reviewing Official shall have authority to grant a variance
upon making a determination in writing that the conditions specified below have been
found to exist:
10
a. That the applicant suffers undue hardship and the variance is necessary
because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size,
shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property, and the
strict application of the Zoning Code is found to deprive subject property owner
of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and
under identical zone classification;
b. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and
zone in which subject property is situated;
c. That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with
the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the
subject property is situated;
d. That the approval as determined by the Hearing Examiner or Board of
Adjustment is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose.
6. Special Review Criteria for Variances from the Aquifer Protection Regulations:
See chapter 8-8 RMC.
7. Continuation of Public Hearing: If for any reason testimony in any manner set for
public hearing, or being heard, cannot be completed on date set for such hearing, the
person presiding at such public hearing or meeting may, before adjournment or recess
of such matters under consideration, publicly announce the time and place to and at
which said meeting will be continued, and no further notice of any kind shall be
required. (Ord. 3463, 8-11-1980; Amd. Ord. 4648, 1-6-1997)
8. Board of Adjustment Decision Process:
a. Board of Adjustment Shall Announce Findings and Decisions: Not more than
thirty (30) days after the termination of the proceedings of the public hearing on
any variance, the Board of Adjustment shall announce its findings and decision.
If a variance is granted, the record shall show such conditions and limitations in
writing as the Board of Adjustment may impose.
b. Notice of Decision of Board of Adjustment: Following the rendering of a
decision on a variance application, a copy of the written order by the Board of
Adjustment shall be mailed to the applicant at the address shown on the
application and filed with the Board of Adjustment and to any other person who
requests a copy thereof.
c. Reconsideration: (Reserved)
d. Record of Decision: Whenever a variance is approved by the Board of
Adjustment, the Development Services Division shall forthwith make an
appropriate record and shall inform the administrative department having
jurisdiction over the matter.
11
Sign Cody,
Review Team Members
Bruce Anderson
Phil Beckley
Heidi Carlson
Doug Cartwright
Dominic Gatto
Al Gould
Beverly Franklin
Alice Maxwell
Sam Pace
Fred Pierson
Marge Richter
Debbie Wicks
Cities that Proiebit Cities thaili4llow
A-Frame Signs A-Frame Signs
Bellevue Sumner
Berkeley Tucson
Bothell
Edmonds
Everett
Federal Way
Issaquah
Kirkland
Lynnwood
Mesa, AZ
Monroe
Mukilteo
Oak Harbor
Palm Desert, CA
Pasadena, AZ
Phoenix, AZ
Redmond
San Antonio, TX
Santa Barbara, CA
Seattle
Sea-Tac
Shelton
Spokane
Tacoma
Tukwilla
Vancouver
CITY CENTEE SIGN REGULATIO7BOUNDARIES
i
k`%_\
I.
N.
ip—
al=
lAij lut
Q-
Km_,. — z -:i= _-
if/5 -_ __ __
a .
r bi- -r _
n
72..s _ice cu al iNNE1,22
CD gm w
Airport Way 0 il11,• -- -_ -
INN
1111 111111111 En I
iii #•#
1 __ _
piaiiiiiiiiiiwirotiNr,
1(ki IM111111 -_-_ ^ _ ,1 - r s1,2 0
m 11:.:7;
1 lioni e am ----,:_-_-- Ens me I* \ 1
A
J S 2nd St r I S nd ' % ,`,
13rd S' Q
II all
Alinffialmo -61 I I I .0_1 J110 III 1) al
in:
mc ialipP q wViiiii al
as& II‘ Owr- aNNI MUD Ziel NM
r ,,,,,,, 4--, --=__. 7..- Mg
a ir. — mom mmi
mon
INN _____.= 8111\
v.
ME NMI
A. I, ttk-\"\ \
EE EE E.
IIII =I'm Pw. gil nal cria) tf) (n1(
1)>
0111'
23I MA i
En WM gm
1 MIN ME
01•J P."
4^
worm=oftmin IMO GIMP IN/MCON.
Norm ram
11=1 / Milvill Norm Mill ink
IOW=_
MEMSireiic-m
L, ;
is_ V us
Mira ra•
mum__ •
r
immla reIlld _AIN
MN MN= IIMII OM METMillle= owAIMMilpmb-1 jall ifIri IP A
1.9 IIII = 1.1 an
MM IMI a" ISM
Marl Ell mai am EI
O , Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning
Q= ED/N/SP
0. Dennison 0 600 1 ,200v, • 27 September 1999
1 :7,200
CITY OF RENTON
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 16, 1999
TO:Laureen Nicolay, Senior Planner
FROM: Paul Baker, Code Compliance
SUBJECT: CODE REVISION; PORTABLE A-FRAME SIGNS
1. Permits: All A-Frame signs require an annual permit. The permit
number placed in the upper left-hand corner, in one-half inch letters
and number size, of weather resistant marking by the permit
applicant.
2. Portable A-Frame signs should be classified as a temporary sign.
3. Location: Signs may be placed on sidewalks and landscaping.
Landscaping cannot be trimmed or modified or damaged to accommodate a
portable A-frame sign. In the City Center area signs must be placed
against the building and business to which the sign relates. In all
other areas signs must be on the property where the business is
located. (no signs off primness)
4. Pedestrian Clearance: A minimum of four feet'of unobstructed sidewalk
area between the outer edge of the sign and the street curb is
required in the City Center sign regulation area. In all other areas
the Portable A-Frame sign cannot restrict the width of the sidewalk
if the sidewalk is less than four feet in width.
5. Size: Recommend a smaller size 241 wide and 301 tall measured
across the face and legs of the sign. The sign faces cannot be less
than 241 wide and 271 tall.
6. Construction Specifications and Materials: The sign and copy must be
of a durable, weather resistant material professionally constructed
no homemade signs) . The permit application form will require the
sign manufacturer's name.
7. Conditions of Display: Portable A-Frame signs are permitted only
during daylight hours. No electrical, electronic, mechanical
attachments to the signs. No balloons, pennants, flags, and wind-
1
1
animated attachments will be permitted. All A-Frame signs must be
placed on the ground or at grade level.
8. Violations and Penalties: Refer to section 4-4-100 T.
9. The sign permit application form needs to be reformatted to eliminate
confusion and be more user friendly. I will be willing to complete
this task.
APPROVED BY
CITY COUNCIL
Date q- /e--97
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE REPORT
September 13, 1999
A-Frame Signs
Referred April 27, 1998)
The Committee recommends that the Council set a public hearing for the above referenced item on
September 27, 1999.,
illYta/t SA—ehl— 0)1Q-e-i0---
Kathy Ke y er-Wheeler, Chair
SO
4(6-1 :'
Dan Clawson,Member
cc: Jana Huerter
MFPkg2.rpt\
111111
A-FRAME SIGNS
TASK FORCE
MiniginVIWKOMENCE
Al Gould . 14021 SE 136 Street 425)226-4692
Renton,WA 98059
Alice Maxwell do Fashion West 425)228-5080=work
465 Renton Center Way SW
Renton,WA 98055
Beverly Franklin P.O. Box 685 425)255-6447=home
Renton,WA 98057 425)271-0511
Bruce Anderson do Park Avenue Antiques 425)255-4255
101 Park Avenue N.425)271-6396=fax
Renton,WA 98055
Debbie Wicks do Fashion West 425)228-5080=work .
465 Renton Center Way SW
Renton,WA 98055
Dominic Gatto 1425 S. Puget Drive,#N5
Renton,WA 98055
Doug Cartwright •P.O. Box 4064 425)226-5148=home
Renton,WA 98057
Fred Pierson c/o GFC Signs 425) 226-1333 =work
253A Rainier Avenue S.
Renton,WA 98055
Heidi Carlson 806 Index Ct.NE 425)226-4030
Renton,WA 98056
Marge Richter 300 Meadow Avenue N.
Renton,WA 98055
Phillip Beckley 655 Ferndale Ct.NE 425)255-8121
Renton,WA 98056 425)430-0499 =work
Sam Pace 3905 — 154th Avenue SE 425) 957-3576=work
SamPace@concentric.net Bellevue,WA 98006-1747 (425)747-3687=fax
206) 972-7653 =cell
8/31/99
Draft
AGENDA
Final Sign Code Review Team Meeting
6th Floor Conference Room, Renton City Hall
May 26, 1999
2:00 PM Corrections and Clarifications of 5-12 Meeting Summary
2:05 PM City staff recommendations presented to Review team
2:15 PM Administrative, enforcement, liability and insurance issues
2:20 PM Final determination of"Downtown" area
2:25 PM Determine if the Review team wishes to recommend to Council more
specific sign size/dimension recommendations (e.g. Beverly Franklin's
suggestions, Berkely and Tuscon regulations, attached).
2:30 PM Options for sign design ("request for proposals"from sign
companies/design contest to determine sign design?)
2:35 PM Discuss the options of a minority report to Council from Doug Cartwright
and/or inclusion of his specific concerns within the City Staff
recommendations?
2:40 PM Display time/hours (if any)
2:45 PM Removal of a-frame sign moratorium
2:50 PM Review team concerns
3:10 PM Final wrap up of issues and adjournment
Attachments: Beverly Franklin's recommended specifications
City of Berkely regulations
City of Tuscon regulations
Existing City of Renton Downtown Sign Area Map
FEB. -17' 99 (WED) 17: 11 BEP '•EY PMT SVC CTR TEL: 8836542 t''uuz
C i"I1( PeggElart
20.08.030 Bulletin board.
Bulletin board"means a structure containing a surface upon which is
displayed the name of a park, church,school, library,community center or similarinstitutionandtheannouncementoftheservicesoractivitiesthereof.
20.08.040 On-premises sign. "On-premises sign"means a sign which
contains any message chosen by the person in control of the premises upon which
the sign is located.
20.08.050 Construction sign.
Constructin sign"means a sign identifying the persons, firms or
businesses directly connected with a construction project.
20.08.060 Directional sign.
Directional sign"means a sign located on.public property indicating the
location of or direc 'on to any place or area.
20.08.070 • -District.
District"means any zoning district designated in the zoning ordinance of
the city.
20.08.080 Electric sign.
Electric signr means a sign containing electric wiring,but shall not
means a sign illuminated by a light or lights,the source of which is not an integral
part of the sign.
20.08.090 Off-premises sign
Off-premises sign"means a sign which contains any message chosen by
a person other the person in control of the premises upon which the sign is
located.
20.08.100 Ground sign.
Ground sign"means a sign which is supported by one or more uprights,
poles or braces in or upon the ground and which is not attached to a building.
20.08.110 Identification sign.
Identification sign"means a sign which designates the name of the owner
or occupant of the premises upon which it is located or identifies the premises,
and shall include professional name plates.
20.08.120 Illuminfited sign.
Illuminated sign"means a sign which is illuminated by means of light
located on the surface of the sign or in the interior of the sign, or which is lighted
by a light the source of which is not an integral part of the sign.
I
FEB. -17' 99 (WED) 17: 11 BEPI/!,,EY PMT SVC CTR TEL: 8836547 P. 003
A. Permits for the installation of such poles are obtained in conformance with
Chapter 20.12 of this code;
B. Barber poles attached to the face of the building do not exceed forty-eight
inches in overall length and do not project from the face of the building
more than twelve inches;
C. Freestanding barber poles do not exceed ninety-six inches in overall height
nor forty-eight inches square at the base and are secured in an approved
manner against lover-turning;D. Barber poles encroaching onto or over the public right-of-way obtain an
encroachment permit from the department of public works.
20.16.180 Window signs.
The sign area of window signs,permanent and temporary,shall not exceed
twenty percent of the Window area of the building premises or three hundred
square feet,whichever is less. Subject to the window area lizriitation herein..
specified,temporary window signs may be in addition to the signs otherwise
permitted on the premises. For the purpose of determining allowable sign area on.
any premises,permanent window signs shall be treated as wall signs.
20.16.185 Shingle signs.
Under the following conditions a premises with a marquee,covered
walkway or canopy my suspend beneath the marquee, covered walkway or
canopy one identification shingle sign in addition to other permitted signs:
A. The sign area shall be debited against the allowable wall sign area for the
premises and shall not exceed three hundred square inches for a single face
area;
B. The clearance of the sign above grade shall be not less than eight feet;
C. The sign must be on premises;
D. The sign shall of be illuminated.
20.16.190 Ground signs permitted on public property-Conditions.
Ground signs shall be permitted on sidewalks and median strips during the
first two Saturdays ana Sundays of May and during every Saturday and Sunday
between Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day if all of the following conditions
are met:
A. The ground sign is located in the area bounded by Sacramento Street,
Gilman Street, the Eastshore Freeway,and Ashby Avenue. The city
council finds and declares that ground signs on sidewalks and median
strips in this area are less likely to interfere with pedestrian traffic than in
other parts of the city in which there is generally more foot traffic.
B. A permit shall be granted by the city manager or his or her designee for
placement of the ground sign based on the following requirements:
1.The sponsor of the ground sign shall indemnify and hold the City
harmless for any and all liability that may result from the
installation of the sign.
FEB. -17' 99 (WED) 17: 16 BEIP'1EY PMT SVC CTR TEL: 8836542 Y_UU1
2. The ground sign does not cause a traffic hazard.
3. The g
r
ound sign does not block any intersection, crosswalk or
accesiramp.
k The ground sign interferes with movement of pedestrians,U'` - ra• including those with disabilities,as little as possible. j"
20,16.195 Signs required.by traffic engineer or as a condition of a permit. - •
In addition to signs expressly permitted in sections contained in this
Chapter, the building official shall authorize installation of any signage required
by the traffic engineer to mitigate traffic or safety,or any signage required by the
city as a condition of a permit obtained for the project.
Chapter 20.20
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS
20.20.010 Scope of regulations.
Except as provided in this chapter and in chapter 20.16,no sign shall be
permitted on private property in any residential district.
20.20.020 ES-R,11-1 and R-1A district signs.
A. The following signs shall be permitted on premises in ES-R, R-1 and R-
1A districts:
1.One wall identification sign for each single-family dwelling not
exceeding seventy-two square inches in sign area,no portion of
which is higher than seven feet above natural ground level;
2.One wall on-premises sign not exceeding seventy-two square
inches in sign area,no portion of which is higher than seven feet
above natural ground level;
3. One wall or ground real estate sign not exceeding six square feet in
sign area,no portion of which is higher than seven feet above
natural ground level;
4.One wall or ground construction sign not exceeding six square feet
in sign area, no portion of which is higher than ten feet above
natural ground level;
5. One wall on-premises sign for each legal non-conforming business,
not to exceed five percent of the building face of the premises or
twenty square feet,whichever is less, no portion of which is higher
than ten feet above natural ground level;
6.One bulletin board as defined in Section 20.16.090 of this code.
B. No moving sign, wind sign,projecting sign or roof sign shall be permitted.
C. Wall identification signs and bulletin boards may be illuminated provided
that the source thereof is not visible and the illumination is
nonintermittent. No other signs shall be illuminated.
FEB 17 1999 11:16 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR 5 e ryi g ae r.e4 eb
C rrY lt)C6C11\1
ORDINANCE NO. 6
THIS CRDINANCE cECCM
rrECTIVE ON:101 BY THEiILiADQPTE)
MAYOR AND COUNCIL
SEPI41998
ORDINANCE NO. gl/,7g
RELATING TO SIGNS AND OUTDOOR ADVERTISING;AMENDING THETUCSONCODECI-IAPTER 3, SIGN CODE, ARTICLE V, GENERALREQUIREMENTSANDLIMITATIONS,-EY ADDING A NEW SECTION 3-62.PORTABLE SIGNS, AND AMENDING SECTION 3-ca, TEMPORARYSIGNS, BY DELETING SECTION 3-Za{E), A--FRAMES; AMENDINGARTICLEVII, EXEMPT SIGNS, BY AMEND ING SECTION 3-73(7),TEMPORARY SIGNS; AND AMENDING ARTICLE XII, REMOVAL OFPRO111131icJ, tLLECAL AND ABANDONED SIGNS, SECTION 3-102,REMOVAL OF ABANDONED, PROHIHIrrD AND ILLEGAL SIGNS SYEUILDINGCFI-ICIaL
BE IT ORDAINED 3Y THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF Tr:E CM( OF
TUCSON, ARIZONA, AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. The TTcscn Ccce, Coater 3, Sign Cc de, Ace V, Genera!
ffeiramerts and Lirnitzdcrs, is `eraCy arrercec v acting a hew Se, icn 3
r:acie Signs, tc ra_c as ,cilc s:
Signs A ncr4ilcarirateC rcr zcle cr-sitere'rc,..:lar snaps sign ter„r:cririiv ,L'thcrzed fcr cre year ant _ tcrweignteCtcthe7rcurc ;cv_.using the Icc ticn, Scccs cr ser,tcascrtre ;remises. A-frame signsgn are rct pei7nitee. in tile pudiccSi't- -way eft where a terrccrary revcc cie easamert has be=r,gr n'__` cr heir ctac r;rent A tt"fra ,- e signs s:.all rct te crusesicec;tinec cn cr ether vise using a ndstzrcing sign.
iLlaximum at93 s;vate cf rCcer;y- Nine S) s.'uat- feet ^er face:right cf way. six (6) scare feet cer fzca_ Dces r•ct C r t againstGiiumaiIcrasignarea
I
FEB-17-1999 11:16 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR
h
520 791 4340 P.05/06
Ma>Qmurrm height private property_ three and one-half(3-1J2)
raec rich;tom-way or sight visibility triangle: two and one-•half(2-112)
reerr
Maximum number. 1 per business,.
Prohibited I cat ans: Site visfoiiiiy triangles cr public right-of-
way exmpt as allowed above.
Distdcfm General business distria, pedestrian business disc irw
freeway business district, industrial•bt iness district, spec::af dis rict. .
All district for businesses immediately adjacent to road orwater
crtstruction projec
sfprf t rs Only after a determination by the Planning
0 irepor aver review by the applicable historic cistrid advisory board
and Tucacc/Pima County Fr:stark al Commission that the signage an
the site cannot provide adequate identification of uses, services cr
products offered art the site upon considering the siting and setback of
structures art the site, c.:rrent signage and other physical features of
tl,e site. lr; historic dist-ids a smaller sign size may be required.
design cnditions may also be imposed_
Gem 'required: A del issued by the City of Tucson for
piacernent of any A-f arise sign shall be displayed on the upper right
arid =rrper of both aCverdsirg faces_ Parable signs authorized to be
located in the public right-of-way shall display a deal of a different
C`icr than signs not aut cr d tc be in the pudic right-of-way.
cesir7 =lC color ;•e.7riz cis r` ui P•r..ir signs
shell ..eet 'a-:a dimension requirements of this Se en and snail to
r ...ar:c tar in shape. All =rr,ccrent s of the parable sign, inL:cing
ore--irc; perimeter around rap: avver sirrg face, snail .ce painted a
c^_ior wri i rnatones t:e Cicr cr w e business esi-tits mend. Postatie
signs ,c=tea in !arc:sc eed areas snail be painted a desert cr•r:
tone. The iissicn of the property owner for use of the sign is also
required. '
Sign maintenance. Portable signs shall be properly rnain=ined
rid any la5c of mainteranc evicencd by brokers sign elements,
peeling, dlippir.r or faking or paint cr lac of proper arrccring snail
make the iecrable sign secx removal..
FEB-17-1999 11 16 DEVLLUNMEN I SENV 1( t5 L I K r l 4J4F r.r o v o
A license to permit the placement cf a temporary-A4 rze signinthept±lic right-of-way may be granted adm .buildu'tgi affrcal upgR the
trt str Y by thewrittentermsandcortdfticrtsasarerequiredbythebiiIdrigofficialandcontainedinthewrittenlicenseagreement,The applicant will submit a written application upon a form to besuppliedbytheOfficeoftheBuildingQlfical: :The building orfcai willtenapproveordenysuchapplication. A license to permit an A-framesigninthepublicright- -cf way shall not be granted until all otherapplicablepermitrequirementscontainedintheTucsonCodeare met.
If
l,any time a license is granted,right-of-Way oied and used
any portion af e-public
by the licensee may be needed orrequiredbytheCityortheIicensee-fails to-maintain signsoastoblockpedestiarttraffic, site visibility, or as teste
bedireby sucnspecifictletrrzsand =nditions set forth by the building cmcal, anylicensegrantedpursuanttothissectionmayberevokedbytheCityandallrightsthereunderareterminated. _y-rt a lic ee shall and willpromptly(remove all property belonging to the licensee from the publicright-
uponwritten noticeof revocation. Ifremovalisrcta=mclished by the licensesinthercuce, within the time speedtheCnywillcausethesigntoberemovedandsiredandthethereofshallbe
the f pin aged to the lic rts Notwithstandingg, any A-fine sign placed in violation of thethisgeCriisdeemed •o be a p,,
praViSians G't'
ublic nuisance and subject to removalbytheCity.
Notwithstanding any remedyer'y provided by any other s;cn cri.is =
de, any potable sign p;ac d cr maintained :n viclaticr, of;hissectoris
e C: r e
giving
emec to be public nu sane.. and suc;e~ to rer;:CVcl Cyeofnotice.
SECTION Z. The i .T cscrt Cade, Chapter 3, Sign Cade, Arddie V, Cere:ai
ire „ r arc L mitat cr s, Se en errsyt% i .,CCI"'':S`f Signs, is nef_eb f
amended by del dig Secicn 3-cC(e), A-Fratres.
Si~CiiCN3. The Tucson Cade, C`aCer 3, Sign Code, Artic:e Ill,
pairs, lees and -'Inswe:crs S cr 27, Fees, :5 ;erg. y amended by
deleting Section 3-2.T(a):3(e) and adding a new su-caragrapn (S) Pr.r.zale
TOTAL P.06
FEB-17-1999 11:15 DEVELOFMEN I SEkV 1 LES L I K Di
NEW GULDELPFES FOR OBTAINING A PERMIT FOR AN A-FIL-tillE OR
PORTABLE SIGN.
An a- me or portable sign is an on-site situ,rectangular in shape,non-
illuminated,teaaporariIy authorized for one year and used to advertise the location,
goods or ser/ices offered on the premises. This sign must be affixed or we:ghred to
the ground.
PLEASE REVIEW THE FOLLOWING RESTRICTIONS BEFORE APPLYZLYG
FOR A PERMIT TO DETERRNIUYE IF AN A FRAME OR PORTABLE SIGN'
WILL BE PEBMuiED AT YOUR BISINESS LOCATION.
I. An a-frame or portable sign is not permitted to be used by any business
identified on or otherwise using a.freestanding sign or tenant directory
A-frames and portable signs are regulated by district—they are permitted in the
general business district,pedestrian business district,freeway business district,
industrial business district and special districts-
A-frames and 1parmble signs may be permitted in a Historic District after a
review process by the Panning Director, the applicable Historic District
Advisory Board and the Tucson Pima County Historical Commission.
4. A-frames or portable signs a e allowed in all districts to advertise those
businesses immediately adjacent ro and affected by road or water cousrr'.zctioa
regardless of any other code provisions.
i ldk: FOLLOWfYG I`TORM.4TIOif WILL BE REQUIRED TO PROCESS
YOf.'R APPLICATON FOR AY s-FRAME OR PORTABLE SXC PERMIT.
1_ A plan check.fee of 53125 will be assessed at the time of aooiicatioa. A scaled
site plan showing property lines,street frontage.sight visibility triangles, future
right of ways, location of a Tame on property and its relationship to ingress and
egress ?obits must be shown on the pian. A dewing of the sign co scale
indicating sign message or copy with color scheme needs co be submitted with
the application.The method of attachment must be indicated on the application.
3_ A site inspection will be conducted of your business establishment to ensure that
your apn icatzon compiles with all provisions of the A-frame ordinance.
3. ;Maximum sign area is 9 square feet with placement on private progeny_
vtazimum sign area is 6 square feet if placed in the public right of way.
FEB-17-1999 11:15 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CTR 520 791 4.540 N.0.5/06
T- Maximum height is 3 Y_ feet if placed oa private property and our of sigic
visibility wanks. A setback of 20 feet is necessary for the sign to be oat of any
sight Iris' triangles 1 laximnm height is 2 Y_feet if placed in the right of
way or in sight(visibility triangles.
A cemaorrf r vocable easement license must be obtained before an A-frame or
portable sign 4 be placed in the public right of way. A yearly fee of S50.00
applies. If the THE is approved -a certificate of insurance must be on file with
the Development Services Center.
6. One A frame or portable sign is permitted per business regardless of the number
of street frnntes a business may have.
7. The permission of the property owner or management company to use an A-
frame or portable sign is required.
S. All components of the A-Dame or portable sip, including a 1" border around
each advertising face,shall be painted a color which matches the color of the
business establishment. Portable or A-frame signs Iocated in landscaped areas
shah be painted a desert or earl tone_
9. Portable or 3-a e signs shall be property maintained and any lack of
maintenance eidenced by broken sign elements. peeling, chipping or flaking of
paint or lack or!proper anchoring shall make the portable sign subject to
removal.
10.A decal issued by the City of Tucson will be affixed to the upper right hand
corner of each advertising face. pot able or A- a:ie signs aurSorzed to be in
the ub is rigkC of way ihs11 disalav a decal of a different color than signs aoc
authored to be in the public right of way.
IL A fee of 562.50 will be assessed yearly for the use of an A-frame or portable sign.
A pena1rr fee of an additional S62-50 will be assessed. if an A-frame or por-able
sign is iast:ile 1 prior to the aecessary permits and ant ioriatioas being
obtained.
12. Noncompliance with any requirements of the 3 frame and portable ordinance
provisions coaild result in the A- me or parable sign being removed or a civil
citation being issued.
4-4-100H 1
I __ -
3. Map of CITY CENTER SIGN REGULATION BOUNDARIES:
Al\-------- I
O.
1 /
1\....;
MI
3-
Ni
I1
is
j c: i
Renton Municipal airport
4444r,.._0.1, 11:41
D_
II :I
I
I J N. N na t
iFiI i.
i i
Loan '
y\\yA1
N481410
4'i i I t
7 \ `
I I tea I '
a_ --;
f )
I
0
5 i_
s ro st f—Lszn+st s zna se
if
i T-----.. 1---,.
Y_1
I, \- LiiIW Wo.
N..,„,
S 7rd St d t
7
i
I :
Sib Hi! I L /''
I
airj-fl n ..,,, ,-
i 1 I
TT._
4 th t 4. Li _SS nth St
O
di g ,...,L.,,, .a.,
H<
r
S
r
t I
i St Hi-Th :
hfn
i
Ord. 4720, 5-4-1998)
Revised 1/99) 4 - 50
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 24, 1999
TO: Sign Code Review Team
FROM: Jana Hanson
SUBJECT: Draft Amendments to City Sign Regulations
A-Frame Signage
Before I submit the attached draft memo and sign code amendments to the Council
Planning and Development Committee, I am seeking your comments. (You will notice
the draft memo also addresses political sign changes which are outside the scope of
our A-Frame amendments; but, at the request of the City Attorney, will be adopted
concurrently with our amendments). Please review the attached draft regulations and
return any comments to me prior to Tuesday, July 13th. Thank you.
1
Draft
SUMMARY OF MAY 12, 1999 "A-FRAME"
SIGN REGULATION REVIEW TEAM MEETING
In attendance:
Doug Cartwright
Beverly Franklin
Heidi Carlson
Phil Beckley
Alice Maxwell
Sam Pace
Recommendation Regarding A-Frame Signs: With the exception of Doug Cartwright,
a strong advocate of continued prohibitions against"A-frame" signage due to safety
and accessibility concerns, the review team members present generally agreed that"A-
frame" signage should be allowed only in Downtown* Renton subject to the following
conditions:
Number of Signs--Only one "A-frame" sign per business should be allowed with
possible allowance for one additional sign for corner businesses with direct public
building access from both street frontages. The A-frame sign would be permitted in
addition to any other permitted signage but could only advertise the business in
front of which it was located.
Location of Signs--Signs would be required to be placed directly in front of the
business adjacent to the building facade facing a public street. A minimum
remaining 6-foot clear sidewalk passage width would be required in order to install a
sign. A-frame signs would not be permitted within or adjacent to alley ways.
Design and Size of Signs--The signs must be sturdy, attractive, standardized in
design, wind resistant and professionally produced. The Review team discussed
the possibility of the City purchasing standardized a-frame sign "frames" and selling
them to the businesses at cost to achieve a standardized and professional look
while keeping costs low for small businesses. The business would then be
responsible for having the sign's advertising area professionally painted or, as an
alternative, obtaining pre-approved channel letters/letter"frames"to allow
changeable messages. The review team felt letter sizes and type styles should
also be standardized. If the Council did not wish to provide the sign frames, sign
and lettering size and design specifications should be specified for professional
sign companies to follow.
Permit Requirements--A permit should be required to initially display a sign and an
annual permit would thereafter be required to ensure annual re-painting and
maintenance of the sign. Annual permits would not be issued for
deteriorated/unsightly signage. One option for City-provided signage would be for
the City to exchange the existing frames for newly painted ones at the time of
annual permit reissuance.
Administration and Enforcement--The Review team felt that the new regulations
and permit procedures should be made as simple and cost-effective as possible.
Note: To permit A-Frame signs while still prohibiting other types of temporary/portable
signage, will reqUire that the sign type definitions be modified to distinguish between A-
Frame and other temporary signs.
Even though he l business was located outside of the downtown area and would,
therefor not benefit from the A-frame recommendation, Alice Maxwell concurred with
the majority Review team recommendation so as not to delay the resolution of the issue
for downtown businesses. Ms. Maxwell expressed hope that further City consideration
would be given tol,permitting A-frame signs in other areas of the City as well, such as
along Rainier Avenue.
Recommendation Regarding Readerboard Signage Outside the Downtown:
The Review team unanimously recommended reviewing and possibly changing the
existing sign code prohibitions against readerboard signs within 75 feet of the right of
way. The discussion centered around allowing Shopping Centers (with 4 or more
tenants) to display readerboard signage closer to the right of way to give more visibility
for smaller businesses within the centers. Issues discussed included landlord
discretion in use/assignment of such signs and also multi-tenant signs.
Recommendation Regarding City-Installed Business Directional Signage: The
Review team unanimously supported the Highlands Community Association's
recommendation that standardized directional signage (kiosk-type) for multiple
businesses be provided at street corners for those downtown businesses which do not
directly front on South 2nd or South 3rd to assist in directing customers to shops with
lesser visibility. Final Review team recommendation should include a sample sign
illustration for Council review.
Other Comments and Issues Discussed:
Several review team members noted that a particularly attractive a-frame sign was
located on Souh 3rd Street in front of a newer antique store (where the Juice Bar
used to be) and that City staff and other Review team members should view this
sign prior to the next meeting.
Heidi Carlson and Phil Beckley reiterated that A-frames should NOT be allowed in
the Highlands neighborhood.
The Review team generally felt that the proposed signage restrictions were
appropriate for the downtown and not other areas due to the pedestrian nature of
the area, City's emphasis on downtown investment, and unique concentration of
retail businesses.
Other Comments and Issues Discussed (continued):
Beverly Franklin and Alice Maxwell noted that their A-frame signs were responsible
for attracting a significant number of customers to their shops (Beverly estimated
her business dropped by 20%when she did not have her sign out and Alice state(
that her sign brought in more business than all her other advertising methods
combined).
An additional meeting should be held to finalize recommendations. A May 26th
meeting date was scheduled for 2:00 PM. The Review team wishes to hear and
discuss the staff recommendations at this time.
The review team expressed concern regarding City/City contracted/utility workers
placing construction-related signs (e.g. "workers ahead") where they obstruct publi
sidewalks and requested that any accessibility violations be addressed. After the
meeting, the complaint was referred to both Neil Watts, Public Works Plan Reviev
Supervisor(425-430-7278), and John Thompson, Public Works Maintenance
Manager(425-235-2585). Neil and John are in charge of the City staff and
contractors who perform work in the right of way and have agree to discuss the
issue generally with public works employees. For site specific problems, please
submit a complaint indicating sign location via phone or intemet (see "code
compliance" located within the "site index" at www.ci.renton.wa.us for the City of
Renton's on-line complaint form).
Issues for Final Meeting--May 26th
See attached Draft Agenda. Please call Clarice Gomes at 425-430-7263 with any
additional agenda items.
c: Neil Watts
John Thompson
CITY-OF R TON
L ( • Renton City Council
Jesse Tanner,Mayor
January 13, 1999 . :
SUBJECT: A Frame Signs
To Interested Parties:
The Renton City Council's Planning&Development Committee will meet to review the
above-referenced item on:
Thursday,January 21, 1999
4:00.PM
7th Floor/Council Conference Room
City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way
Renton,Washington
This is not a public hearing,but a working session of the Planning&Development
Committee. As!all Council Committee meetings are open to the public,you are welcome to
attend.
If you have questions regarding this meeting,please phone Julia Medzegian, Council
Liaison, at 425-430-6501.
Sincerely,
071—' Wku
Kathy Keolkerl-IWheeler, Chair
Planning &Development Committee
Renton City Council
1055 South Grady Way -Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6501
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 15, 1998
TO: Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Chair
Members of the Planning&Development Committee
FROM: Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator C.
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
STAFF CONTACT: Jana Huerter, ext. 7218
SUBJECT: A-FRAME SIGNS
ISSUE:
The Planning and Development Committee has instructed staff to work with a group of Renton
business owners, residents and members of the Highlands Community Association to study the issue
of A-Frame signs. This work group was formed as a result of complaints to the City Council from
business owners subjected to the enforcement of A-Frame sign regulations as well as concerned
citizens who believe that A-Frames are unattractive, add clutter to the streetscape, and create hazards
for both pedestrians and motorists.
RECOMMENDATION:
The work group met on three separate occasions to discuss the issue, and several ideas were brought
forth. However, due to the diverse positions within the group, we were unable to come to a
consensus on any one proposal. The following proposals are representative of the discussions from
our meetings:
1. Permit A-Frame signs throughout the City, subject to the following conditions: 0 Size and type
of construction would be restricted (32" wide by 36" high, 1/2" thick sign board), as well as the
number of signs per business (one sign per business); © Prohibit signs in landscaped areas,
required parking and on streets; ® Allow signs to be placed only on sidewalks that are 10 feet
or wider; ® Signsi must be located against the building; © Require a sign permit and impose a
fine for illegal signs ($100.00 to $500.00).
2. Permit A-Frame signs throughout the City, subject to the conditions listed above. However, for
businesses that do not have visibility from the public right-of-way (i.e. - businesses within a
shopping center), A-Frames would be permitted within landscaped areas and along sidewalks not
directly abutting the business.
September 14, 1998
Page 2
Electronic message bo rds were discussed as an option for businesses within shopping centers. It
was agreed that the el ctronic message boards could provide an advertising venue for the various
businesses within the ce ters. There was general consensus that electronic message boards should be
allowed as permitted signs, regardless of whether A-Frames were permitted or not.
3. Allow A-Frame signs within the downtown core only, subject to the same conditions listed in
option #1 above.
4. Continue to prohibi A-Frame signs and all other portable signs, with the exception of real estate
open house signs. is is consistent with codes from other jurisdictions surveyed (see attached
issue paper dated 6/11/98). Also, amend the sign code to allow directional signs as a part of a
planter or light standard in downtown, and within shopping centers such as Fred Meyer (see
attachment B).
BACKGROUND SUMMARY:
In June of this year, several business owners brought their complaints to the City Council regarding
the enforcement of A-Frame sign restrictions. As a result of complaints from a business owner, the
City's Code Compliance Officer issued several "Notices To Correct"-to business owners displaying
A-Frame signs throughdut the City. Although A-Frame signs, as well as most other temporary signs,
have been illegal for many years, enforcement usually occurs on a complaint basis due to limited staff
resources.
At the June 11, 1998, Planning & Development Committee meeting, business owners, a
representative from the Realtors Association, and a citizen from the Highlands discussed their
concerns regarding AiFrame signs. Following the discussion, the Planning & Development
Committee directed sta to facilitate a work team made up of both business owners and citizens to
mdeveloprecomendations for the Committee's review. The work team met on three different
occasions. The meethi.gs were attended by business owners, a representative from the Realtors
Association and citize from the Highlands area. At the first meeting we viewed a video prepared
by staff. The video de icted the unattractive clutter of temporary signs displayed all over the streets
of Renton. Many of the signs were placed in areas that presented safety hazards to both motorists
and pedestrians. It was generally agreed by the attendees of the meeting, that unregulated temporary
signage distracted from the streetscape and was undesirable. Despite this consensus, the business
owners felt strongly that, in some cases, A-Frames (which they wished to distinguish from other
types of temporary signs), are appropriate and necessary for the success of businesses. Those
attendees representing the Highlands Community Association and a physically disabled citizen, all I
agreed that the signs should continue to be restricted. The issues brought up by these individuals
included pedestrian/disabled safety and accessibility, and concern for the City's image.
Since the group was unable to agree on a single city-wide approach to regulating A-Frame signs, we
have instead presented the various positions and ideas of the group. The above options are not
mutually exclusive of one another, and it is reasonable to imagine elements from each option
combined to create one or two potential sign code amendments. All of the members of the group
agreed that real estate open house signs should continue to be allowed and regulated in the manner
that is stipulated in the City sign code.
1
September 14, 1998
Page 3
CONCLUSION:
Regulating signage is perhaps one of the toughest code-related issues to deal with; the City must
consider the many diffe9ent interests held by all of its constituents. Businesses naturally desire more
signage in order to be recognized and to ensure success. Many citizens prefer prohibiting portable,
temporary signs in order to rid the city of unattractive clutter. Maintaining pedestrian and wheel-
chair accessible sidewalks is also a priority and concern for the City. The City's 1999-2004 Business
Plan Goals specifically include improving the City's image and, as shown on the video provided by
staff, unregulated temporary signage definitely casts a negative image.
All four of the options include provisions to regulate signs. If the Council decides to conditionally
permit A-Frame signs (options 1, 2, or 3), then in order for the code to be effectively and equitably
administered and enforced, additional resources would be needed within the Development Services
Division.
attachments: A-HCA's Position Paper On A-Frame and Portable Signs
B-June 11, 1998 Memo to Planning&Development Committee
C-July 1, 1998 Memo to A-Frame Work Group
CITY OF RENTON
ATTACHMENT A RECEIVED
AUG 2 41998
BUILDING DIVISION
Position Paper on A-Frame and Portable Signs
Presented by Highlands Community Association
Renton City Hall, August 25, 1998
Study:
This informal paper has been prepared to present the position of HCA on the continuing
tolerance policy by the City of Renton on the display of A-Frame and portable signs.
HCA's Position:
HCA's position regarding the use of A-Frame and portable signs is straight forward. Our
research committee has concluded that such signs should be banned from streets, sidewalks,
landscaping,and alleys in the city of Renton;the city's current tolerance policy should not
continue. In any forthcoming revision to the governing city ordinance,the only exceptions
or deviations from this strict policy should be Real Estate Open House signs since that
industry is self-regulating.
Background:
In the beginning of our study,HCA had taken the position that subject signage should be •
banned but exceptions should be allowed for new businesses during their first year of
operation. However, further study and a modest poll has convinced our association that all
subject signage should be banned (with the exception of Real Estate Open House signage).
Because the burden of enforcement would be great,the city cannot go "half-way". The city
must either persist with a broad tolerance policy,or portable signage should be banned
altogether,as proposed here.
Rationale:
If subject signage is allowed under a broad tolerance policy,it should be with the
understanding that businesses using such signage must pay the costs of policing ordinance
enforcement and administration. HCA's broad-brush estimate for annually overseeing this
project would include the cost of employing one full-time enforcement officer plus program
administrative costs for managing one thousand (1000) signs,as follows:
Enforcement Officer 70,000 (salary+ benefits)
Administrative Costs 20.000
Annual Total 90,000
Interim Opinions:
Several shop owners have stated they need A-Frames to stay in business.
Perhaps what they need is effective signage,not A-Frames. One business owner said that
we,in Renton,do not want to be "another Bellevue." We have found that,in fact,most
Rentonites would be pleased to have a reputation like Bellevue—that of a clean,safe,and
attractive.city. Our city government will spend thousands of dollars over the next three years
solely to improve Renton's image. Yes,we would very much like to incorporate the best of
Bellevue into our hometown! From a moving vehicle,A-Frame signs are little more than '
litter strewn along sidewalks,streets and green ways. Bellevue,Kent,Issaquah and Tukwila
have ordinances against A-Frame signs for good reason. It does not insult our sensibilities
to emulate the best of what we see in our neighbors.We deserve it.
Somehow,shopping areas of cities like Renton have to be made more beautiful and
interesting than the big shopping malls. Continuing the ugliness of bad signage will not
bring in more customers—in fact,HCA believes this blight drives people away to The Bon,
Penney's,Nordstrom,and elsewhere.
Additional Information:
Opinion Poll: A short opinion poll was conducted by researcher and HCA Board Member
Carole Thiele,during Renton River Days, 1998,with the following results: Most of the
persons polled could not recall any information they read on A-Frame signs,including
business names. They said they"tuned out" signs,in much the same way they"tune out"
elevator music or a patch of weeds. Results of the short poll are attached (Exhibit A).
Petition: A petition stating that A-Frames should be banned in the city was circulated for a
few hours during Renton River Days '98. A copy of that petition is attached (Exhibit B).
HCA Design Recommendation:
The illustration provided to HCA at an A-Frame Task Force meeting has been amended by
our designer. The illustration shows multiple business signs attached to a pole to be placed
near street corners in a business area. HCA's modification shows the pole centered in a
large,round,stone or concrete planter. It is hoped the planters will contain bedding plants,
vines or ground cover to be maintained by the city or volunteers. (Exhibit C).
Summary:
HCA's position is to ban A-Frame and portable signage and replace it with something better.
HCA believes that Renton is truly at a crossroads. Either we will continue to ignore eye-
sores on our streets,sidewalks,green spaces and alleys,and get angry when comedians make
fun of us on the TV show Almost Live, or we can take pride in Renton and clean it up.
Ultimately,all of us will benefit from a clean,attractive city.
e
2
r
Exhibit A: HCA's Informal Poll
Regarding A-Frame signs in the Renton Highlands along Sunset Blvd. NE
Place: Renton River Days
Date/Times: Saturday,August 2, 1998, 1:00-3:O0pm
Questions Asked: Do you think A-Frame signs are an effective means of attracting
customers to businesses?.
Results:
66°/ Ten (10) people were unaware of the use of A-Frames to advertise
businesses,indicating the signs have no particular drawing power. (People
shut them out).
6% One (1) person remembered seeing a red cross on one sign,but
couldn't recall the business.
14% Two (2) people thought the A-Frames were unsightly.
14% Two (2) people "didn't care one way or another."
100%Total
Exhibit B
Petition—A-Frame sign opposition
A group of Highla ids residents expressing opposition to A-Frame signs circulated a petition
briefly in August 1998. Copies containing signatures and addresses are attached.
Exhibit C
Highlands. Community Association's Recommendation
An A-Frame Alternative
See attached.
3
x1-k 1$,-r
We, the undersigned, agree at advertising sandwich boards (A-frame signs) should be banned in the City of
Renton. The signs are unsightly, unnecessary;and obtrusive.
Signature Printed Name Address
e.6,, ., celes7t. r i..O 1- E-
L 4)4-77 ua v
Lc_rr., e
l.) .t 1, U ,7' S 6 C i1)9c 1 Uc A', glre55-6
LT Marle4) si-- a D6
oS,
v Al VC irc ( 836 WOG Abe • E.esu 'ronJ 1
wei i
iy II/C's°0" th Of(Iv Lafy 144-p igi-,z— , ,:g,---a-7 1`:*-- S-7z7 ea-,7 1---A
t
0 r - ---- Gji_jpo fel:"_ VP (fa-14 I ride)c c_T NE 4-Tc--
j-Ze4j9(/ 7Itz3-e-
j• leot-4-„ • 70..Zp_ ,OZ-- 2 c - .
s7 G6--,, ,,L,
Pco i---41- ALL S.S a `-(© L. p 1 1 n-1 uoily C unr, A v1c N 8u s (2
1.
E2c_ 3 3 c /V 6 / A s6I.I c.Cp .?C Gl IMP
IL
li fjb 0 IPi6 i& T-/, 4 Ke-V V,,i7/L4 t/A:- A A=
IL L R/:J / w 4
er 2)
a
C44 uP H j-i irLc Si e P moo,,/.! e- c/Cr ,,/
Nifint77 d l (41 Y i -n V4 Al/10 Cf JJ( 1 t b,,
0 il- /d•avL/- C eV (13 .1G(c- 6f/.7-,,I,/te( << 4-1
It
Ye.Ce .teZZ/ . c-ki-L,e i4 '.'/..Z.-. .3,& / / S / /? c r> op,b /4 u Z.Air /2=k
11
71. L / t-24c r>h r,1s l 1 11 ecgt, I 1 5 1. R 5 ))V (jU Q 111,1t . it) r i W
11
helm 2(6/219E)
r.
We,.the undersigned, agree that advertising sandwich boards (A-frame signs) should be. banned in the City of
f•1 Renton. The signs are niLightly; unnecessary; and ol)trusive.
Signature Printed Name Address
i
0' . li ( , 1 7P Cy C-r z1, SRZ O. 5 `e 67 1?, e J. - .iLl 5'` ;1/-zc4
j
12l ce /
J-'
j a„c.-I g --/--6 AIVA: 5 4 Ai ci E ' 3o/ F, / 7)30 (767A1-1a N.
04 oUwk '.a- dam- tth-)11 A L 130 eat 3 d N/r' /5 Sr- 8..0„,..c,-,-
e-'k [i N C r Li v k a stir 5 G-'f
lQ 3 Q 3 /-,G 4 I' !-rt! —r-
01. b.41.11,7 rl1 cT.
e)t 4'.-,Kcii.
4,-r. :
4>
t - E 1--,L• .t f Y C .C• A S b 6 /V /7• E- /9 t`%3 -6. . "
1, M. ) l q_ 1 re 0 27<z- / y2f/7 eper, S a/-
c....„-, •
l¢ '-A --_—,,,-(
4.,--
7' I-4 11 RA i. k:u ,-e1 32 i t Ai. 6. r i.^' •• i1 e,:. ;_ %%Q,•.s
U`Ui 4 4_,.• wr II , , H „„ r
J yJ // / (-
7-/- ' J- ( '
71?-
t E.c• 14'-Idr 7ie le / 5 j i f ,71'7 I r/ii(,) _ 5. j zx • Al_
Te iliji:4 E i. . /y-. \AI; so' -/v
A& /2. , ,:..i- .,
u
0 0. /9 r e,'c e• 1 e)
3 _"=-)- 7 t- •-ys—A-1-,_LZcs-es-i` Z .v A'
14. yi
aL
Paema 2(612)90
t
Ex-1-\1fl B
We, the undersigned, agree that advertising sandwich boards (A-frame signs) should be banned in the City of
Renton. The signs are unsightly, unnecessary, and obtrusive.
Signs ure Printed Name Address
i t-( L t c 4 , a ,i t-r e e 3a I -11 Z. i'.a.,./
v
712trazdeline 72'1/chat Ut Ph o' o4) f // N /04' / Ai )4)0 Ul0.6'064
a3I)r(
2-e-a2 ( I LL\ Lr C,SS Fee r DA.L cr, 73. ectz
fT AA/Ai c c c%t.ti'gct,
IL
IL
Pea=2(NINIE) .
Exhibit C
HCA's Design Suggestion:
An A-Frame Alternative
i
t
r,I h! t rq'
552,E 4,t Z i ,3y-G=rut 6 yu.v is kf y iL 3 5c,
r ma.rt,,,,b y 43 '3^° 4)x%.-,,, ..,,,,'4,!'....
11:
j`
MINN
9 +,; 0 '' .l _- This is a
1,- °", i i composite
jr I --A,--. , . - photograph.
1/4. ',74-,?'``,/-47,Plkii: [1,:,;;Z:"'''..,4‘,_,z;.-4::.!:: :7i?
v {>F , a y, ,,.x .4,:
7,l'ANZ..*:',1;
Y :s? ' 1 ' OArtA:15.0 :1T1.?'
14%mi l. .t2...,- ., .r ...,,-,4• 4.•tie
Features:
e Round concrete planter with tapered sides and a pebble finish—Approx.
diameter=3 feet.
O Round or square pole (concrete & aluminum) rising at least 8 feet above the
planting surface.
e Arrow-pointed signs pointing in the direction of the business with business
name affixed to the pole.
i 1
ATTACHMENT B
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 11, 1998
TO: Kathy Keollcer-Wheeler, Chair
Planning and Development Committee Members
FROM: - Jana Huerter,Land Use Review Supervisor
Development Services Division
SUBJECT: A-FRAME SIGNS
ISSUE:
The City's Code Compliance Section has recently received a number of complaints regarding A-Frame
signs. In response, the City's Code Compliance Officer investigated the complaints most of which
resulted in the issuancel of notices to correct. As a result of the business community's reaction to the
enforcement, the City Council, by way of Resolution 3327 enacted a moratorium on enforcement of A-
Frame signs. While the moratorium is in effect, Council has directed staff to identify,the issues regarding
A-Frame signs and provide options for Council consideration. The following is a list of possible options:
OPTIONS:
Retain existing restrictions against A-Frame signs except for real estate directional signs in the public
right-of-way.
Distinguish between A-Frames and other types of portable signs (e.g., banners, and other signs types
not permanently affixed) and allow A-Frame signs outright without any restrictions.
Allow A-Frame signs with the following restrictions: 1) Limit size to 2 feet wide and 3 feet tall; 2)
require a permit in addition to the right-of-way permit,if needed. A permit will also give the location
of signs; .3)prohibit placement of signs in vehicle sight triangles or in such a manner as to constitute
a safety hazard, or in a manner that impacts ADA access; 4) require that signs be removed during
hours when business is closed; 5) any sign in violation of these regulations would be confiscated
and a Civil Penalty of$500 would be assessed against the business owner for each day that the
violation occurs.
Retain existing restrictions except for real estate directional signs, and as an alternative for other
business, allow directory signs (e.g., kiosks in the downtown with a directory of businesses ,and
arrows directing tiie public to the location). Shopping centers could also use this type of signage
which would be a lowed in addition to the existing allowed signage. (See attachments B-1 and B-2).
J
June 11, 1998
Page 2
BACKGROUND SUMMARY:
Since the enactment of the aforementioned moratorium, staff has surveyed various cities seeking
information on the treatment of A-Frame signs. The lists of cities include: Bellevue, Bothell, Edmonds,
Everett, Federal Way , Issaquah, King County, Kirkland, Lynnwood, Monroe, Redmond, Seattle,
Tukwila and Kent. All of the cities surveyed prohibit portable signs,with several having an exception for
real estate directional signs. Also supporting the prohibition of portable signs is the model sign
ordinance, Street Graphics and the Law(Mandelker and Ewald 1988).
In addition to traffic and safety hazards, one of the most common problems with A-Frame signs, as
voiced by all of the surveyed jurisdictions, is enforcement. Allowing A-Frame signs with conditions on
placement and size, would considerably impact the City's code enforcement program. Thes signs already
present an enforcement problem. However, to allow them conditionally would require significantly more
effort from code enforcement staff. Cities such as Redmond, that have allowed A-Frame signs have
repealed their ordinances and reinstated codes prohibiting such signage for safety reasons and also for
lack of code compliance capabilities.
As already mentioned, most jurisdictions permit real estate directional signs, typically with conditions.
Attached is a paper prepared by the Seattle/King County Association of Realtors that provides support
for allowing the real estate signs. The Association has also stated that they provide a program to assist
jurisdictions with the enforcement of illegally placed real estate signs.
CONCLUSION:
As presented by staff, of the options listed, prohibiting A-Frames except for real estate signs, is the
preferred choice from an enforcement point of view. Other methods of identification are possible with
simple amendments to the code. However,these methods are typically more expensive signs and may be
cost prohibitive for smaller businesses. On the other hand, A-Frame signs provide businesses with a
relatively inexpensive means to advertise, and the fact that they are portable and can be placed in areas
that provide more visibility for the businesses is an attractive and tempting feature.
ISSUE.DOT/
ATTACHMENT B-1
4- lc... ,:.
I.• i..... 7..
ii: • 41
44.10 . .fv-
i1•.;: ;I
0 I
Ill • 111
ti 1
4; .li
i: .I
0
7'''''..'71"4-.'-'...- -!....-....... .. ..
J0..:77';''":"Iii;a7,:.: f.
zz::....,;
17.4.•• ••,
s..r.. .."..:„..... *
4.V
4 1. • 1: c,
EPtsi-5 6-t.A.1.-LT S.t-T O'l 11' ..% 4.:vG . DEL-1 la P
I R 8 t
7 riz...E_L- .tcls. Trit\ITIQU. S. I ,. ... LPOsiTiaLl. PAL.1-\CE 1. --)
ItfiFpCOuiS TAI.M.DFLok.N. :,:li: I POST cs., -•17..-ICE b TJ
I - • b
i •:'• d
1-c--/
DPI-1-1E_.5 64 GE It& f •-•,..* I • r ) .
r; • ,S.:.SZ-..--,-.
1 4•
4-SrA rci Pi •::%.
S-- • 8 ...*. •
c•-•--
z t-...'774-rnOS a 1 i
b ".:- • :
7..Ei-ii-TLE• -FkusT-6...i . i:•1
1-..•.t.•
t .,
i
1 .../
1::
I.
I
I i',.,
1, •
i
01
P ";
ATTACHMENT B-2
Y
1
l
I
1
419
f
Eta.
113,,..:.
1. •, =
fix.
r ..•."•'' ti•'11.`'•?
fr•• •
v:_ •
bu ,. ,g,,q
ATTACHMENT C
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 1, 1998
TO: Phil Beckley, Beverly Franklin, Doug Cartwright, Al Gould, Sam Pace,
and Alice Maxwell
FROM: Jana Huerter, Land Use Review Supervisor
SUBJECT: A-FRAME SIGNS
At the meeting of June 24, we discussed several ideas and options regarding A-Frame signs. I have
attempted to list and group some of those ideas together. The following, hopefully, reflects the
discussions at our meeting.
1. Allow A-frame sign with the following conditions: Limit the minimum and maximum; require
signs to be constructed from a heavy rigid material; require a sign permit for A-Frames which
must be displayed oil the sign; require all signs to be removed after a certain hour (e.g., 7:00 PM)
unless it is a 24 hr business,then signs must be secured in some way so that they cannot be
vandalized; restrict location of signs; restrict the number of A-Frames allowed per business.
Additional resour es would be required to enforce this program. This would likely require
an new full time employee who would focus only on signage in order for this program to be
effective and rid the city of illegal signs.
2. Create a sign program that dictates design, size and location. Areas and/or neighborhoods could
be identified by individualized.design themes. Such signage would be in addition to allowed
signage per the City Sign Code. Possible City subsidy for signage???
This may fit into Kathy Keolker-Wheeler's idea of creating distinct identifications for
different districts I ithin the City. Again, the same comment as above would apply in order
to provide an effective program. Some businesses may complain because of the cost
associated with sins that have particular design and construction requirements. City may
not have funds available to assist in the cost of signs for entire City and targeting only certain
areas may create problems for the City with respect to fairness.
3. For new businesses, in locations with poor visibility, allow A-Frames in public rights-of-way, and
in other locations that provide better visibility. These signs would be permitted for a limited
period of time. Tl1e intent behind this idea is to support the success of small businesses which in
turn will encourage the redevelopment of older centers and attract a variety of other businesses.
This would likely result in complaints from other business as an issue of fairness. This would
also require additional staff resources to monitor and enforce.
June 25, 1998
Page 2
4. Notify all business of regulations pertaining to A-Frames and other temporary signs. Work on a
campaign with the Chamber to bring businesses on board to work towards improving the city's
image. Encourage business owners/operators to enforce sign regulations upon each other. Have
volunteer enforcement teams inform businesses of sign regulations and the benefit to improving
the city's image through reducing visual clutter associated with unregulated temporary signs.
Initial coordination could be handled with existing staff. There would still be a need for city
code compliance staff to handle enforcement process beyond volunteer's capabilities (e.g., if
process goes beyond the issuance of a citation), however, this may be accomplished with
existing staff. Keeping volunteers involved and consistent with enforcement may be
problematic.
5. Implement a-severe citation process for businesses that fail to comply with sign regulations. Issue
500.00 fines, and or revoke business licenses following the issuance of a second notice to correct.
This would be a strong deterrent. Additional staff would be needed to monitor and enforce.
6. Propose a new position in the Code Compliance Section to concentrate only on the enforcement of
signs. This could be proposed whether we allow A-Frames or not. This was felt to be a positive
step towards improving the image of our City's business districts.
This would be a major step towards reducing visual clutter and hazards that many of the
temporary signs present. This new program would cost the city approximately $50-
60,000.00 a year. A request has been approved by the City Council for a limited term code
compliance officer, however it is anticipated that this position will support the existing Code
Compliance Officer and primarily focus on neighborhood issues such as junk vehicles,
overgrown vegetation and debris. It would take an additional employee to concentrate only
on signage issues.
7. Continue to prohibit A-Frames and other types of temporary signs, but implement a City
sponsored sign program that subsidizes directional signs in the downtown district and possibly
other business districts as well. Allow for additional signage in shopping centers that provide
direction to businesses. (see attachment)
This may be helpful in certain areas; but not every business will be able to benefit from this
type of signage. It is questionable whether the City would agree to sponsor or help pay for
a signage program of this type.
I believe that the above pretty well summarizes our discussions. I would also like to pass on
information that was given to me by Beverly Franklin with respect to the sizing and construction of
signs. Beverly's recommendation, based on her experience with several types of A-Frame signs, is the
following:
MBO 1/2"boards, 32 x 36 in size
Please feel free to give me a call to share any ideas prior to our next meeting. Also, if you have any
questions about the City's Sign Code please give me a call at 430-7218. I will look forward to seeing
all of you at our next meeting,Wednesday, August 5 at 2:00 PM.
Thanks!!
CITY OF RENTON
DEPART MENT OF PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 22, 1998
TO:Jana Huerter,Principal Planner
52......FROM: Robert Arthur,Land Use Compliance Inspe
SUBJECT: OPTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED REGARDING USE OF TEMPORARY SIGNS
MORE COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS SANDWICH-BOARD SIGNS OR"A"
FR ME SIGNS
The use of temporary signage, more commonly referred to as "Sandwich Board" or "A-Frame" signs,
has been brought before the Renton City Council. The Council,by way of Resolution3327 dated May 18,
1998, enacted a Moratorium on enforcement of the Sign Code with respect to those temporary or portable
signs commonly know as A-frame of Sandwich-board signs.
Under Section V of the resolution the moratorium shall be in effect until the City Council takes action by
either amending the ign Code or declining to amend the Sign Code with respect to temporary or portable
signs commonly know as A-frame or Sandwich-board signs.
As you requested, I am submitting options for possible consideration by the Planning and Development
Committee for their presentation to the City Council.
For brevity purposes in the remainder of this report, A-Frame or Sandwich-board signs will be referred to
as portable signs
OPTION 1.
The first option would be to decline to amend the Sign Code with respect to the use of portable signs.
I
There are numerous jurisdictions statewide that prohibit portable signs. The list includes Bellevue,
Bothell, Edmonds,I Everett, Federal Way, Issaquah, King County, Kirkland, Lynnwood, Monroe,
Mukilteo, Oak Harbor, Redmond, Seattle, Sea-Tac, Shelton, Spokane, Tacoma, Tukwila, and Vancouver,
just to name a few.
Supporting the prohibition of portable signs, Street Graphics and the Law (Mandelker and Ewald 1988),
in the model ordinal ce,prohibit portable signs:
There is sufficient case law supporting the prohibition of portable signs.
1.Risner v. City of Wyoming, 383 N.W.2d 226 (Mich. App. 1985) (suggested in dictum that total
prohibition of portable signs is constitutional).
2.Lindsay v. City of San Antonio, 821 F.2d 1103 (5th Cir. 1987),upheld portable sign prohibition.
3.Harnish v.Manatee County,783 F.2d 1535 (11th Cir. 1986),upheld an ordinance prohibiting
portable signs.
4.In Collier v.Tacoma, 121 Wn.2d 737, 854 P.2d 1046 (1993).,the Supreme Court of the State of
Washington held that portable signs may be prohibited from the right-of-way.
The disadvantages of portable signs are that any restrictions are difficult to enforce. Portable signs raise
potential traffic/pedestrian safety issues and would result in the need for heavy enforcement by a limited
staff. Also, allowing portable signs in one area would open the issue for other zoning districts since
portable signs are currently prohibited throughout the City(except real estate open house signs).
An additional valid concern, particularly where the portable signs would be entirely on the right-of-way
sidewalk), the placement of these portable signs may well conflict with Americans With Disabilities Act
of 1990 (ADA).
The City of Redmond; in 1979,prohibited portable signs. Later that same year the City Council passed an
Ordinance allowing use of portable signage primarily because of concerns of adverse economic impacts on
businesses. In the late 80's or early 90's Redmonds Planning Commission suggested a ban on portable
signs. The Redmond downtown committee became very active in this issue. Subsequently the City
Council continued toi allow the portable signs. One of the stipulations of this allowance was that the
Downtown Associati9n stated they would police or enforce the placement of the portable signs. This
obviously did not work. The City Council, in 1997, enacted an Ordinance prohibiting the use of portable
signs. The reasons cited were:
1.Safety
a.Some signs were being placed in the sight triangle(obstructing view of oncoming
traffic).
b.Signs were being placed in the middle of the sidewalk and medians.
c.Tripping hazard for persons with visual impairments
d.ADA requirements.
2.Aesthetics
3.Ineffective bl cause observation of the signs was being obscured by parked vehicles
4.Lack of Code Compliance capabilities.
5.Businesses from other jurisdictions were bringing their portable signs into the City of Redmond
and displaying them.
OPTION 2.
The second option would be the outright allowance of portable signs. I do not believe that this is a viable
option because of the inherent enforcement, safety and aesthetic concerns. The City has embarked on a
beautification program and this would be a step backwards.
OPTION 3
The third option would be to allow portable signs with the following restrictions:
1.Size limited to 2'wide by 3' tall.
2.Permit required, including a right-of-way use permit when such signs would have to be placed in
the right-of-way(downtown sidewalk area,business frontage on NE Sunset,etc.).
3.Graphics limited to name of business and address.,
4.Approval sticker attached so it would be plainly visible by Inspectors.
5.Permit would clearly indicate where sign may be placed.
6.Any portable(sign in violation of these restrictions would be confiscated and a Civil Penalty of
500 would b1e assessed against the business owner for each and every day that the violation is
allowed to continue.
7.Allowing the portable sign for a maximum of ninety days per calendar year.
The downside to this pption must be pointed out. Although the restrictions would be mandated, there is
still the difficulty enforcing them with the existing manpower.
OPTION 4 1
The forth option would involve the City of Renton becoming innovative in revising the Sign Ordinance
while still retaining the prohibition the portable signs
1.A possible alternative to portable signs would be the use of multi-business directory signs placed
on poles at the back of sidewalk or in the case of the downtown core area,in the sidewalk(please
refer to attachment B-1 and B-2).
2.Revising the Sign Code to allow changes similar to the recent revisions for the Downtown Core.
One possibility would be permitting a higher signage allowance for shopping centers which
would include the following:
a.Include directory signage so that people entering the center area would be able to see
where tenants are located.
b.Require that shopping center signs have sufficient space to contain listings of the tenants
in the shopping center. A good example of this would be the Fred Meyer shopping
center. This sign should have been designed with and for the purpose of integrating the
tenants into the sign facia. A good example of this type of signage is the Burkheimer
retiail center at Rainier Ave. N and Airport Way.
ATTACHMENT B,1
7••
i .f
11
1J
h
zrE N Bt./;UTY S'hoi t .7;
C:c •G rDE.L.-I
ii:-\t\ITIQL.le_.5 I I. ••• j/20,1TICILL PALACE_it 5-'
Fp-couis•t-\LI DFLouJai-Or • 1 Pos-r ccF Ica b .
6-4 Qv
r.
L•J‘RE,,,rrot3 Go'1J-4-STick rnP
8
z cg- 1
b
FA•Lus-r- 1
f
I •
9"
I
V.
ATTACHMENT B-2
ocs•wilh
4.:1,,
bia
ler..A'•±4' ''..-:--,,:'".F?T..''
solisises____—••''' Arera 1
s__w••••_ --;-, . o'741!
I':';:t:
t"•
o•'••••.#.''s7'•1-- •.•';i•..iili•i .•1
1..1.. •--'' :
I
WII10611014.::._•!::_--.vi f •:6n4i1
z?
DAP.,•• _•-' .'•• 1,',' •--' -•• ) • .•
Wa....r.• .:.i.... t:•.... C..-.1:I,. 0.14.!d
1 .•.1 r ,\\N **
ri.''.•;! ••- ' 'Ili.— , 4••• ' ••• . iti V- i• ,y•-• • f• 41. •• t‘,t.....mMic L• _.:
t. ir, ; •'. .; h•:'. 1.-• •tIfiki ;.Z;.•;
4:: .
14E.0 t Aalit:..a .: ',•;...
liV ;4,47i::V.:;y1-Tilig. .•••:',..- :.
4'. ..' ,.;* . -'
t'
s --..t.:c54„ 11 A-10).V 4.1 .. . •...
1,5ri........... f i1.-,..41.fr ... • '''''7' • 1.7; .•
7.. :'., • .-
lagia*
Z7 1-:...\.. - -..---,-- ; . . - .. .,:•• ,. . •
1.- . .1.
1.1•'-
I• .Vine-•ro-•••0' --. -...-64;..-- •7• it'— '1:•••er'e`...7.— a <-. = .w...§ ''.....f..., Aug.4...44"...2..r's•J'''''': • • — ' ' .. ' - 'ITO'., ':4;q47441.1,ri°1•• a - —7. 44 I,'•..4.. •.•1 .'•t( l'.. "...•.•. ,
4 4' ...9: 7.. •."••,frE• •..., , , , -... /4.0,-,.-1%. '%.•• .*•', ..
4-,.... --.... ,
1•_,,,s ii• vor:•.;,•.,••-1,•• ,•..
t .",.,
i tko% ••. ••;*: : .6 ; "../'s'' ' ' ..'"'"V• ' . 1, si ,
ts.7''. .4. ti;;;'40=47:;1,,,..:!. ••'
41••...it it, .4, ;*4...-..• •'
1 .
1,fr•`Zi.ti.,•:4,1,'•,- " ‘". a 44,;•*---;:v9ir-. •,
f.....
z...':.-.-
t"--..-4i.4•/•:. 'er,• . 1 i
44.. . P:,/..•tc,e,e•Jr.• :1•• •.
7.•t•••;*1'2.1 .' '
0.••• !:.•• . • -". --•. 'I'ir'.• :• • .. . '* ••• • , '•r •
4 ' -.,,, • kr ..,aithig I. t...I. .:, c. ••• •,,' ••,•.: •••N -
y;.. 4-1'•.••• 0:. , : •ii.,,,. 4
t* -. •..• : .. •
t'..-.-..0,„ •i»..:. ,•..;• ,. • ' ?
64."'.-..i. 4';' ' !./ •• - ' • '
4 p' '? , 'ft • •1,1",-...,.. .• • .... ...,,.., ''''
r...‘...',•1 .16'•r"' -
Meeting Notes From 5/26
Tasks:
1. Amend Sign Code to distinguish between A-Frame signs and other temporary signs.
2. Propose a demonstration ordinance that would allow A-Frame signs within the
downtown area(same geographical boundaries as defined in the Sign Ordinance).
Recommend 12 month test period.
3. Establish Variance criteria that takes into account businesses that cio not have direct
visibility from the public right of way(e.g., Fred Meyers Center businesses).
4. Define AFrame signs and include construction specifications. (this info will be
provided by Fred). Provide Council with options on size of signs e.g., 32 inches wide
by 48 inches tall or 32"by 36".
5. Establish criteria for allowing A-Frames: constructed per specifications; must be
placed against the building not along the street curb;there must a minimum of 4 feet
between the outer edge of the sign and the sidewalk. This area must be unobstructed.;
design should be a question left up to the council; require a permit for signs ($100.00
fee) staff will inspect sign prior to permit approval to ensure that sign is constructed
and placed per our code; add language that will enable Code Compliance to enforce
signs in disrepair; one sign per business street frontage.
y" 6. Recommend terminating the existing moratorium which will allow us to enforce all of
the temporary signs. Replace with a new moratorium that allows aframes in the
downtown only per our recommended criteria until the ordinance is written.
7.
8.