Loading...
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.