Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2006-07-24 Item 4A - Ordinance - Amend Sign Codes for Changing Message Signs COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS s 2 sti''• r,,; all I1arisNo. 4 1.91: 1 Muting Date 1 Prepared by 410Alla)ar's raw I Commit nrzw 1 t J 1 07/24/06 1 BM for SCI 1 c luk I I I I I ITEM INFORMATION CAS NUMBER: 06-077 I ORIGLNAL AGENDA DATE: 7/10/06 AGENDA ITE.MT]TLE Sign Code Revisions CATEGORY Disausion i%Ioiion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award ❑Public Hearing Other Mtg Date 7/24 Mtg Date 1122 Date ALB Date M(g Date .1122 Date Mig Date SPONSOR Council Alger Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire Legal PeaR Police PIP" SPONSOR'S The Tukwila School District has requested that the City's sign code be modified to permit SU).LMARY changing message displays. The City's sign code currently bans any sign that changes content more than once every 24- hours. The proposed draft ordinance would permit public facilities to have changing message displays that change content no more than once every 10 seconds. REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CARP Cmte FRS Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: 4/25/06 5/25/06 6/22/06 RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMLN. Set a date for a public hearing. CoMMIInEE CAP referred the matter to the Planning Commission. COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $N /A $N /A $N /A Fund Source: N/A Comments: N/A MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 7/24 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 7/24 Staff Report 7/24 Draft Ordinance 7/24 Community Affairs and Parks Minutes from the April 25, 2006 Meeting 7/24 Planning Commission Minutes from May Meeting 7/24 DRAFT Planning Commission Minutes from the June Meeting. 7/24 1 Map of properties eligible for changing message signs. J �wiv\ cy G_ City o f T M. la op. Steven Mullet, Mayor etiv 1-i) Iu; t Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director 1908 Committee of the Whole Staff Report l� FROM: Steve Lancaster, Director Brandon Miles, Assistant Planner RE. Changing Message Signs DATE: July 19, 2006 Issue The City has been approached by the Tukwila School District to amend Title 19 of the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) to permit signs which change more frequently than once every 24- hours. The School District proposes to install an electronic message center at Foster High School. Planning Staff briefed Community Affairs and Parks (CAP) on April 25, 2006. CAP referred the matter to the Planning Commission and on May 25, 2006 the Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing. On June 22, 2006, the Planning Commission closed the Public Hearing and made a recommendation to the Council. Analysis of Existina Code Title 19 of the TMC regulates all types of signage in the City Unless specifically listed as exempted, a sign permit is required for all types of signs that are discernable from adjacent properties and the City's rights of way (TMC 19 12.010). Any permanent signs, either freestanding or wall sign are required to have a sign pem lt. In all commercial and industrial zones most businesses, if they qualify, can have two signs. The business can choose from two wall signs or a freestanding and wall sign. The City applies different development standards for signs located in residential zones. Under TMC 19.32.080 churches, schools, public facilities, and conditional uses may have one sign for every street they front. No sign may be greater than 50 square feet in size. The sign may either be a wall or freestanding sign. Any use in the City may have an electronic message center as part of the sign. However, under TMC 19.08.030, if the sign changes more frequently than once Brandon -M Page 1 07/19/2006 Q: \Sign\School District\CC \COW STAFF REPORT.doc 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Phone: 206 -431 -3670 Fax: 206 431 -3665 every 24- hours, the sign would be considered an animated sign. Animated signs are strictly prohibited in the City (TMC 19.28.010). Tukwila School District has proposed an electronic message sign that would change copy more than once every 24 -hours and thus would not be permitted in the City Discussion Tukwila's land use regulations attempt to minimize impacts within residential zones by restricting certain activities. All schools in the City are located in and are adjacent to Low Density Residential zoned land. Schools provide a sense of community and a gathering place for City residents. Events that occur at schools provide opportunities for Tukwila residents to interact. Placing a changing message sign, such as what the School District is proposing would allow the District to advertise many events that benefit the community The City limits many activities that occur within residential zones. Most commercial operations are excluded, home occupations are permitted but under very specific conditions, and almost all non residential uses that may locate in residential zones require a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Options Planning Staff presented these options regarding this issue to the Planning Commission at the May 25, 2006 meeting. These options are similar to the ones that were presented to CAP at the meeting on April 25, 2006. 1 No Action. The Planning Commission could choose to take no action, in which case the proposed sign, if erected, would be limited to no more than one message change per day No flashing, blinking, scrolling or other message movement would be allowed. The School District has indicated that they would not construct the sign under these circumstances. 2. Modify the definition of "animated sign The definition could be modified to allow changing messages more frequently than once every 24- hours. The Planning Commission could also consider relaxing restrictions on flashing, scrolling or other effects. Any modification to the definition would apply citywide. 3. Exemption for community event announcements. Brandon -M Page 2 07/19/2006 O: \Sign \School District\CC \COW STAFF REPORT.doc 3A. Allow any otherwise permitted sign within the City to display changing messages but limit the message to public service announcements. For example, the City of Lacey allows public service signs to have changing message signs. "Public service signs in the form of changing message center signs may be permitted. However, the changing message center signs shall not be used for commercial purposes, such as to advertise a product, service, or use. Messages will be strictly limited to public information regarding activities, events, time, date, temperature, atmospheric condition and news of interest to the general public. Said signs shall be limited to the type, size, shape, and location specked for the zoning district in which said signs are located' 3B. Allow only public facilities to have changing message signs. This would allow the school district to construct a changing message sign. It would also allow for all schools, libraries, and City buildings such as City Hall and the Community Center to have a changing message sign. The term "public facility" is defined in TMC 19.08.175 to mean any facility funded with public funds which provides a service to the general public, including but not limited to a public school, public library, community center, public park, government facility or similar use. Most of public facilities are located within residential zones. Staff has provided an attached map which shows all schools, City facilities, libraries, and utility district offices within the City The City currently exempts changing message signs limited to "time, date and temperature" from the City's animated sign prohibition. The City could extend this exemption to also allow changing messages relating to "community events or announcements" It should be noted that the courts have been increasingly critical of govemment sign regulations that base privileges or restrictions upon the content of the message. 4 Eliminate prohibition of animated signs. The Planning Commission could recommend the prohibition against animated signs for the entire City being removed. Plannino Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission chose to pursue option 3B and allow public facilities to be permitted to have changing message signs. Brandon -M Page 3 07/19/2006 Q:1SignlSchool District \CCICOW STAFF REPORT.doc Attachment "A" is the proposed ordinance and is in legislative format. New language that will be added is shown underline and deleted language is shown as s trikoth roug h, Modify TMC 19.04.020 to add the following purpose clause: 2. The City desires to provide sign options that encouraae public agencies to communicate with members of the public. Add language to the definition of animated signs (19.08.030): "Animated sign" means any sign or portion or which physically moves, appears to flash, undulate, pulse, or portray explosions, fireworks, flashes of light, or blinking or chasing lights, or which appears to move toward or away from the viewer, to expand or contract, bounce, rotate, spin, twist, scroll, travel or otherwise portrays movement or animated at a frequency more rapid than once every 24 hours. Signs or portions of signs displaying a changing message content that is strictly limited to time, date, or temperature or those permitted under TMC 19.32.300 shall not be construed to be animated. Scoreboards shall not be considered to animated signs. Add the following section to 19.32 `Regulations Based on Land Use Categories" TMC.19.32.300 "Additional Sian Regulations for Public Facilities" A. Signs located at public facilities which meet the criteria of TMC 19.32.080 mav use the sign as a chanoina message sign. provided the following: 1 The image on the sian mav not change more freauentiv than once every ten seconds. 2. The image must appear and disappear as one imaoe. The imaoe mav not appear to flash. undulate. pulse. or portray explosions. fireworks. flashes of light. or blinkina or chasing liahts. or appear to move toward or away from the viewer. to expand or contract. bounce. rotate. spin. twist. scroll. travel or otherwise portray movement. 3. If the public facility is located within a residential zone the use of the electronic portion of the sign is limited to the hours of 7am to 10pm. (Note: Any electronic sign in the City must meet the illumination and brightness levels set in TMC 19 16.035). B. Notice of Understanding 1 Anv public facility that installs and operates a chanoina message sign must submit a letter to the Department sianed by the appropriate manager /administrator that notes understandina of the above requirements Brandon -M Page 4 07/19/2006 Q:\Sign \School District\CC \COW STAFF REPORT.doc and a assurance that the sign will be used in the appropriate manner as stated in section 19.32.300 (A) (1 -3). C. Order of Removal 1 The Director of Cornmunity Development shall order the removal of anv sign constructed pursuant to TMC 1932.300 if the sion is used in such a wav to violate the provisions of this chapter. D. The language codified in TMC 19.32.300 shall sunset exactly one year from the effective date of the ordinance. Any public facility, which installs and operates a changing message sion must continue to comply with TMC 19.32.300 (A)(1 -3) for the life of the sion and will be considered a non conforming sion and subiect to the limitations in TMC 19.30. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed code language in a 5-1 vote. Altematives Any of the actions listed under the "Option" section of this Staff Report are available. Next Step Set a date for a public hearing. Brandon -M Page 5 07/19/2006 Q:\Sign \School District\CC \COW STAFF REPORT.doc Li El AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NOS. 1274, 2019 AND 2096, AS CODIFIED IN TUKWILA. MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 19, 'SIGN CODE," TO EXPAND THE PURPOSES OF THE SIGN CODE, AND TO CREATE ADDITIONAL SIGN REGULATIONS FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES; ESTABLISHIHNG A SUNSET PROVISION; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council desires to provide public agencies sign options to allow them to communicate with members of the public; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to regulate certain types of signage Located at public facilities; and 'WHEREAS, the City Council desires to update the Sign Code by addressing signage in certain zones where signs are typically not found; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to increase public cafety and minimize driver distractions; and WHEREAS, on May 25, 2006 and June 22, 2006 the Tukwila Planning Commission, following adequate public notice, held a public hearing to receive testimony concerning amending the Sign Code; and on June 22, 2006 adopted a motion recommending the proposed changes; and WHEREAS, on August 7, 2006, the Tukwila City Council, following adequate public notice, held a public hearing to receive testimony concerning the recommendations of the Planning Commission; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Ordinance No. 1274 §1 (part), as codified at TMC 19.04.020, "General Provisions: Purposes,' is hereby amended to read as follows: 19.04.020 Purposes The purposes of this code are: 1. To establish standards and guidelines for the design, erection and installation of signs and other visual communication devices so that the streets of Tukwila may appear orderly, and safety may be increased by minimizing clutter and distraction. 2. To provide sign options that encourage public agencies to communicate with members of the public. lk C \Doav'.sr. zed Settlings L: rss D cp \Ky \N DA MO LL- Cc4 a oc BMLan 7122006 Page 1 of 3 3. To establish administrative procedures for the implementation of this code. 4. To assure that 'the regulations of this code are not intended to permit any violation of the provisions of any other applicable federal, State or local regulation. Section 2. Ordinance Nos. 1274, 2019 §1, and 2096 §1 (part), as codified at TMC 19.08.030, "Definitions: Animated Sign," are hereby amended to read as follows: Animated sign" means any sign or portion of which physically moves, appears to flash, undulate, pnlre, or portray explosions, fireworks, flashes of light, or blinking or chasing lights, or which appears to move toward or away from the viewer, to expand or contract, bounce, rotate, spiny twist scroll, travel or other +ise portrays movement or animation at a frequency more rapid than once every 24 hours. Signs or portions of signs displaying a changing message content that is strictly limited to time date or temperature, or those permitted under TMC 19.32.300, shall not be construed to be animated. Scoreboards shall not be considered animated signs. Section 3. TMC Chapter 1932, "Regulations Based on Land Use Categories,' is hereby amended to include additional sign regulations for public facilities, as follows: 1932300 Electronic Message Boards A. Signs located at public facilities that meet the criteria of TMC 19.32300 may use the sign as a changing message sign, provided that the following criteria is also met 1. The image on the sign may not change more frequently than once every ten seconds. 2. The image must appear and disappear as one image. The image may not appear to flash, undulate, pulse, or portray explosions, fireworks, flashes of light, or blinking or chasing lights, or appear to move toward or away from the viewer, to expand or contract, bounce, rotate, spin, twist, scroll, travel or otherwise portray movement 3. If the public facility is located within a residential zone, the use of the electronic portion of the sign is limited to the hours of 7AM to 10PM. B. Notice of understanding. Any public facility that installs and operates a changing message sign must submit a letter to the Director of the Department of Community Development, signed by the appropriate manager /administrator, which notes understanding of the above requirements and an assurance that the sign will be- used in the appropriate manner as stated in TMC 19.32300(A)(1 -3). C Order of Removal: The Director of Community Development shall order the removal of any sign constructed pursuant to TMC 19.32300 if the sign is used in such a way that violates the provisions of this chapter. D. The language codified in TMC 19.32.300 shall sunset exactly one year from the effective date of the ordinance that adopted the code language. Any public facility that installs and operates a changing message sign must continue to comply with TMC 19.32300(A)(1 -3) for the life of the sign, and will be considered a non conforming sign and subject to the limitations in TMC 19.30. Cw and \AR L= \D- _Ytop\Xc?ly\ISSDATA\O :w \Sp Codedx sva. 7PRX36 Page 2 of 3 Section 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, dansr or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force five days after passage and publication as provided by law PASSED BY THE QTY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of 2006. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Steven M. Mullet Mayor Jane E. Cantu, CMC, City Clerk Filed with the Qty Clerk: APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Office of the City Attorney Ordinance Number: C\rbcw�.aG and Seffi, \AR *Ts\D&p \_°ylMSDAT lOrdP'ncesISf:gt 4dadcc Bev 711276 Page 3 of 3 Cap rn'&w i es 445-04 4. Foster High School Sign Proposal. Scott Erdahl, Athletic Director for the Tukwila School District, presented the school district's proposal to replace the existing reader board in front of Foster High School with an electronic message center sign that would )(e likely have display capabilities that exceed the allowances of the Tukwila sign code. A new electronic reader board would allow the District to display multiple messages about school and community activities. The District is receptive to limiting operating times of the LED board to certain hours of the day and limiting animation and flashing background displays. Mr. Lancaster confirmed that the TMC 19.28.010(3) sign code prohibits "animated signs" and the proposed Foster High School sign would be considered an "animated sign" if operated in a manner that causes the electronic message to flash, blink, scroll or otherwise portray movement, or if any message other than time/date/temperature changes more than once every 24 hours. However, if the committee is interested in considering the School District's request, staff recommends the issue be referred to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation. The Committee members discussed various concerns about the sign impacting adjacent residences, vehicle and pedestrian traffic, and what kind of a precedent it would set for other schools and businesses who may want to be allowed to have electronic signs. Mr. Lancaster several alternatives for the committee to consider. One of the options could be to recommend an exemption for community event announcements. This exemption could be applied to all signs or could be limited to specific land uses such as public schools and public recreation facilities. Other options could include modifying the definition of an "animated sign" or exempting electronic message centers, but continue to prohibit flashing, streaming, video quality display signs. After considerable discussion of the various options, the majority of the committee members recommended the issue be forwarded to the Planning Commission for their review and recommendation. The Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing and forward their recommendation to the City Council. Jmh Committee Chair Approval Minutes Prepared by Joan Hernandez j PLANNING COMVIISSION PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES MAY 25, 2006 The Public Hearing was called to order by Chair Ekberg at 7:00 PM Present: Chair, Allan Ekberg, Vice Chair, George Malina, Commissioners, Bill Arthur, Lynn Peterson, Chuck Parrish. Absent: Commissioners Margaret Bratcher and Henry Marvin Representing City Staff: Steve Lancaster, Nora Gierloff, Brandon Miles, and Wynetta Bivens BILL ARTHUR MADE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE WORKSESSION MINUTES AND THE PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES FROM MAY 25, 2006. GEORGE MALINA SECONDED ME MOTION; THE MOTION WAS UNAt \7\i MOUSLY APPROVED. Chair Ekberg swore in those wishing to give public testimony PLANNING CONL IISSION CASE NUMBER L06-030 APPLICANT City of Tukwila REQUEST Modification of chapter 19 of the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) regarding changing message signs at Public Facilities within the City LOCATION: Citywide Commissioner Arthur gave a public disclaimer that he received an e -mail from Steve Lancaster, Director, Department of Community Development. Commissioner Arthur stated that the appearance of the e-mail was different than what he would normally receive from Mr. Lancaster. Commissioner Arthur called Mr. Lancaster and inquired whether the e-mail was from a third party After receiving confirmation that the e- mail was from a third party, he informed Mr. Lancaster that he was going to delete the e-mail. He said, for the record, that he does not open., receive, or read unsolicited e- mails. Commissioner Arthur also talked about the rules, procedures and policies that the Planning Commission practice. Mr. Lancaster responded to Commissioner Arthur's comments and gave clarification on what transpired. He stated that the e-mail he sent to Commissioner Arthur was also forwarded to all of the Planning Commission members for whom staff has an e -mail address. Mr. Lancaster forwarded the information to one Planning Commission member whom staff does not have an e -mail address for by mail. He explained that the matter was legislative and that he should have been clearer in communicating that to the Planning Commission members. Other Planning Commission members acknowledged that they too had received the e -mail, and that it addressed a legislative matter, concerning a case that was on the 5/25/06 agenda. CASE NUMBER: L06 -030 APPLICANT City of Tukwila REQUEST. Modification of Chapter 19 of the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) regarding changing message signs at Public Facilities within the City LOCATION: Citywide Plannine Commission Minutes May 25 Page 2 of Brandon Miles, Planner, Department pf Community Development, gave a presentation on the proposed project. Mr. Miles provided some background and answered numerous questions. Staff requests that the Planning Commission provide direction in regards to a possible Sign Code amendment, after conducting a public hearing. Staff has provided four options: 1. No Action. 2. Modify the definition of "animated sign" 3A, 3B Exemption for community event announcements. 4. Eliminate prohibition of animated sign. The options were listed in detail in the 5/25/06 package. Mr Lancaster provided some additional information on the last paragraph in option 3A and 3B, which reads `It should be noted that the courts have been increasingly critical of government sign regulations that base privileges or restrictions upon the content of the message.' Mr. Lancaster explained that the courts almost look at these kinds of cases as highly suspect and that they take a very careful and close look with almost a presumption that it could be a constitutional problem. Therefore, he urged the Planning Commission to be a little cautious, suggesting possibly limiting allowing signs that have public service kinds of announcements, to not be subjected to the same regulations as signs that provide a general message. Mr. Lancaster stated that option 2 would be on quite safe ground and staff could support that. He stated that option 4 is pretty radical from past practices, but staff could support it. BM Van de Bogart, School District Business Manager, gave the presentation for the applicant. Mr. Van de Bogart addressed the matter concerning the e-mail that Mr. Lancaster forwarded to the Planning Commissioners. He stated that he wanted to get the information to the Commission in advance, to provide them time to read the school districts request. Mr. Van de Bogart said their mission is very clear to work with the parents and teach the children the very best that they can. They struggle with how to communicate with the multi languages in the community He gave a PowerPoint presentation, showing a picture of the existing sign and the new proposed sign, calling the old sign worthless because it is time consuming to change and unfeasible to change in several different languages. The proposed sign would change to several different languages to reach the children. Mr. Van de Bogart answered numerous questions. Kathy Znak, a citizen, expressed her concerns regarding the accident probability for non english speaking people in the community trying to fmd something in their languages. She suggested that a traffic study is done. REBUTTAL: None. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: Mr. Lancaster asked the Planning Commission, "If the applicant's request was accommodated how broadly do you want to accommodate it?" After extensive discussion, the Planning Commission determined they needed some additional information in order to make a decision. Staff needs to follow up on the following: 1. Check with the City Attorney to see if allowing what is otherwise a static sign to change to different languages permissible? 2. Provide additional information on brightness. 3. What are the variances of frequency for the changing message sign? 4. What would be a good timeframe for allowing_ animation? Planning Commission Minutes May 25 Page 3 of 4 i\Ir. Lancaster suggested that the Commission take a look at what other Cities are allowing. Mr. Lancaster stated that his goal is to bring back to the next meeting, a proposed ordinance for the Planning Commission to look at. There was discussion on possible legal ramifications if a decision is challenged. The simplest thing would be to apply whatever decision the Planning Commission makes across the board to any legal sign in Tukwila There were no further comments. Chair Ekberg continued the case to the June 22, 2006 Public Hearing. CASE NUMBER L06 -023 APPLICANT City of Tukwila REQUEST Creation of a `Wireless Telecommunications Chapter" within the City's Zoning Code. The chapter will regulate the placement and operation of wireless communication facilities. The chapter will provide guidance on where such facilities can locate in the City, development standards, approval process, and exception criteria. LOCATION: Citywide Brandon Miles, Planner, Department of Community Development, gave the presentation for staff. Mr. Miles facilitated discussion on the seven areas of the ordinance as listed in the May 10, 2006 Staff Report to provide the Planning Commission the opportunity to incorporate any revisions. The next step will be for the Planning Commission to forward a recommendation to the City Council for consideration. Commissioner Parrish raised the question whether staff had discussed the proposed purpose and intent with the IT Department and Council Member Haggerton. Staff stated there has been discussion with Councilmember Haggerton and that he has not provided them with any input at this time. There have also been informal conversations with other Cities and departments. Suggested Revisions: Item 1: Purnose and Intent: 4 Remove the word `adequate' Item 2: Exemptions: 2 Revise language Item 3: Definition 9 (this section already exist in the Zoning Code, however, it will be amended in order for Planning and PTV to have the exact definition) Take a look at Black's Law dictionary for the definition of Rights of Way -10 Correct misspelled word. Item 4: Permit Review Matrix Staff was asked to return with a recommendation regarding the benefits, risk, and cost of changing Type 3 decisions to Type 2 decisions. Staff will return with some good design standards for Utility Pole Co- Location Possibly changing from a Type 2 decision. Mr. Lancaster made the request that very very clear design standards should be in place if it's a Type 2 decision. One possibility is that it has to be a metal pole with all of the Planning Commission Minutes May 25 2006 Page 4 of cables concealed inside the pole to be a Type 2. If this guideline is not feasible, the decision type bumps up to a higher level. Staff shall provide a recommendation for the following option: If there are no design standards and the utility pole co- Location is changed only in a residential area, should it be a Type 4 decision? Kathy Johnson, a Wireless Provider Consultant, provided some insight regarding utility poles because there has been a bit of contention. Wood poles are preferred by the utility providers because of the time involved in designing and engineering steel poles capable of holding the antennas. Most in the community find the wood pole less intrusive in the area and there are ways to mount the antennas around them. Ms. Johnson offered to bring in some pictures for the Planning Commission to review Ms. Johnson also offered to arrange to have a RF Engineer come with her, to speak at the next Planning Commission meeting. Item 5: New Mononoles: The following sentence should be incorporated in the draft policy Any new monopole within the City will be required to allow co- location of other providers who wish to locate on the facility' Incorporate language for a certain amount of growth to support co-locations. Draft Ordinance Revisions: Page 3, letter b. Sentence needs to be modified Page 3, Type (table) Numbers need to be consistent in table in both the draft and the Staff Report Page 5, No. 4 Parking Modify language Page 5, No. 4 Antenna Intensity— Modify language `Feed lines and coaxial cables shall be attached securely and appropriately to one of the transmission towers Page 6, No. 2 Antennas Aesthetics Modify Language The screening must be made out of the same material and match the color scheme' Mr Miles recommended that the public hearing is continued and that staff return with additional information. There were no further comments. REBUTTAL: None. Chair Ekberg continued the case to the June 22, 2006 Public Hearing. Director's Report: Update on mall construction Sound Transit Light Rail project going on Update on Tukwila Station project Chair Ekberg asked for an update on the Klickitat project Meeting adjourned at 9:50 PM Submitted by Wynetta Bivens Secretary Adopted 6/22/06 PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES JUNE 22, 2006 The Public Hearing was called to order by Chair Ekberg at 7:00 PM Present: Chair, Allan Ekberg, Vice Chair, George Malina, Commissioners, Margaret Bratcher, Bill Arthur, Lynn Peterson, and Chuck Parrish. Absent: Commissioner, Henry Marvin Representing City Staff: Steve Lancaster, Brandon Miles, Sandra Whiting, Cyndy Knighton, and Wynetta Bivens COM ?IISSIONER ARTHUR MADE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE PUBLIC HEARINNG MINTJTES AS MODIFIED, FROM JUNE 22, 2006. COMIMIISSIONER BRATCHER SECONDED THE MOTION; I'HE MOTION WAS UNANIii%IOUSLY APPROVED. Steve Lancaster, Director, Department of Community Development, introduced Cyndy Knighton. Cyndy Knighton, Senior Traffic Engineer, Public Works, gave a PowerPoint presentation on the Klickitat Project, which is a significant project for the City Cyndy provided some background from the beginning of the project, listing the goals that the City identified and wanted to accomplish. A study was done to determine what could be done to the area, which resulted in the establishment of the alternative 3B concept. Due to concerns from some consultants that the design wasn't the most feasible to construct, the City came up with the idea of a design competition. HMTB Corporation was awarded the contract and came up with the current design. The City strongly believes the design has a lot of potential for an award winning design and construction. Ms. Knighton shared many details of the project, and then answered questions. Mr. Lancaster also introduced Sandra Whiting. Sandra Whiting, Urban Environmentalist, Department of Community Development, gave a PowerPoint presentation on the wetlands mitigation, which she has already presented to the City Council, whom the program was endorsed by She provided some background on the program. It has been determined that on site mitigation is not always practical and that off site mitigation might be a better solution. Part of the project is to take a look at what areas could be used as mitigation sites. The objective of the program that was developed is to help facilitate development for smaller developers. It would offer alternatives to on site mitigation by providing some ideas where off site mitigation in Tukwila can occur. In addition, it would provide increased environmental projects and increased wetland functions. Chair Ekberg swore in those wishing to give public testimony PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NUMBER. L06 -034 APPLICANT Cingular Wireless REQUEST The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to modify an existing wireless communication facility, which will be located on an existing City Light transmission tower. The antennas will be located on the top of the transmission tower. In order to meet minimum clearance from the high voltage electrical lines, the existing tower will be extended five feet in height. Planning. Commission Minutes June 22, 2006 PaQC 2 of 6 The associated ground equipment will be located directly below the transmission tower in a 400 square foot enclosure. A chain -link fence with barbwire will enclose the 400 square foot enclosure. The enclosure will include a 256 square foot concrete pad where the cabinet equipment will be located. LOCATION: City Light transmission tower, adjacent to the United States Postal Facility and State Route 99 King County Parcel Number 042304 -9130. Commissioner Arthur made a declaration that his adult daughter that lives with him works for Cingular Wireless. He stated he did not believe the relationship would have any bearing on his objectivity There was no objection to Commissioner Arthur hearing the case. Brandon Miles, Planner, Department of Community Development, gave a PowerPoint presentation on the proposed project. As a result of the merger between AT &T and Cingular Wireless, a lot of the sites need to be upgraded to accommodate both networks. The maximum height in the MIC/H district is 125 feet. The applicant is proposing that the antennas have a height of approximately 153 feet. This type of application does not trigger compliance with the height requirements because it does not trigger a building permit, since it's on City Light's transmission tower. There is no impact to pedestrians. The need to move the antennas is a City Light safety requirement, to make it safer for their employees to service the line. There was a question raised regarding FAA lighting, which Mr. Miles deferred to the applicant. Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit, as presented, with one condition: 1. All equipment attached to the City Light Transmission tower shall be painted to match the color of the tower. Sara Telschow, for the applicant, Realcom Associates, addressed the question raised regarding FAA lighting. There is no FAA lighting proposed for this project since it is only increasing by five feet in height. The applicant agrees with staff's condition; however, Ms. Telschow explained that it is very difficult to maintain paint on coaxial cables, therefore, requested that it not be a condition to paint them. REBUTTAL: Staff stated that if FAA lighting is necessary as a result of the proposed application, they will address it and determine if it needs to come back to the Planning Commission. There were no further comments. The Public Hearing was closed. The Planning Commission Deliberated. CHAIR EKBERG MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMiEIT FOR CASE NUMBER L06 -034 WITH STAFF'S FI\PLNGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS, AND THE ONE CONDITION TO READ: 1. ALL EQUIPMENT ATTACHED TO THE CITY LIGHT TRA\S\IISSION TOWER SHALL BE P_ALNTED TO MATCH PHE COLOR OF 1'Hr; TOWER, WITH THE EXECPTION OF THE CO -AXIAL CABLES, WHICH SHALL MATCH THE EXSTLN'G CO- AXIAL CABLES ON THE SITE. COILZIISSIONER ARI'HGR SECONDED THE MOTION; THE MOTION WAS UNANLMOUSLY APPROVED. Planning Commission Minutes June 22,2006 Page 3 of 6 Chair Ekberg asked staff to come back to the Planning Commission some time in the future with some ideas on how the FAA is engaged in lighting situations and who may be responsible for such situations. Steve Lancaster provided some information on what the process is if the FAA needs to be, or is involved in, situations where lighting is necessary Prior to opening the public hearing on case number L06 -030, Chair Ekberg called a recess. The Planning Commission and Staff gathered outside to look at the proposed electronic message board that the applicant had available for them to view. 5 -25 -06 PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: CASE NUMBER. L06 -030 APPLICANT City of Tukwila REQUEST Modification of Chapter 19 of the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) regarding changing message signs at public facilities within the City LOCATION: Citywide Brandon Miles, Planner, Department of Community Development, gave the presentation for staff. He provided background on the May 25` public hearing. At the May 25 public hearing, staff briefed the Planning Commission on a proposal from the Tukwila School District. The request was for modification of the Sign Code, to allow changing message signs at Foster High School. The school district's main reason for the sign is to display important messages to students and parents in multiple Languages. Following the May meeting, the Planning Department spoke with the Parks Department concerning what needs they may have for this type of sign. The Parks Department indicated that such a sign could be used at the Tukwila Community Center to advertise events. Staff did some additional research on safety impacts for these types of signs. However, the Staff Report showed inconclusive either way regarding safety impacts from these signs. Information was mostly geared toward highways. Staff has provided a Draft Ordinance (Attachment A 6/22/06 Planning Commission packet) with the following proposed changes: 1. Modify TMC 19.04.20 to add the following purpose clause: The City desires to provide sign options that encourage public agencies to communicate with members of the public. 2. Add language to the definition of animated signs (19.08.030) Animated Sign: Following temperature add `or those permitted tinder TMC 19.32.300' Additional sign regulations for public facilities 19.32.300 Electronic Message Boards A. Signs located at public facilities, which meet the criteria of TMC 19.32.300, may use the sign as a changing message sign, provided the following: 1. The image on the sign may not change more frequently than once every ten seconds. 2. The image must appear and disappear as one image. The image may not appear to flash, undulate, pulse, pothay explosions, fireworks, flashes of light, blinking or chasing lights, Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 2006 Page 4 of 6 appear to move toward or away from the viewer, expand or contract, bounce, rotate, spin, twist, scroll, travel or otherwise portray movement. 3. If the public facility is located within a residential zone, the use of the electronic portion of the sign is limited to the hours of 7 am to lOpm. B. Notice of understanding: 1. Any public facility that installs and operates a changing message sign must submit a letter to the Department of Community Development, signed by the appropriate manager /administrator that notes understanding of the above requirements and assurance that the sign will be used in the appropriate manner as stated in section 19.32.300 (A)(1 -3). C. Order of Removal: 1. The Director of Community Development shall order the removal of any sign erected pursuant to TMC 19.32:300 if the sign is used in such a way as to violate the provisions of this chapter. Staff's Recommedation: Planning Staff recommends that the Planning Commission conclude the public hearing that started at the May meeting and that the proposed changes listed in the Draft Ordinance be forwarded with a recommendation of approval to the City Council. Alternatives: The following alternative actions are available to the Planning Commission: 1. Continue the public hearing at the July meeting and request additional information from the Planning Staff. 2. Any of the proposed alternatives which were listed in the May Staff Report (Attachment B). Steve Lancaster, Director, Department of Community Development, addressed the issue of proposed alternatives. He indicated that, based upon the testimony and discussion at the Planning Commission's May 25 meeting, staff believed it was the Commissions desire to pursue an altemative allowing electronic message boards to be displayed by public facilities. He indicated that the other options outlined in the staff reports are still in play, and that it is up to the Commission to decide what it wants to recommend to the City Council. There was additional discussion regarding the proposed ordinance language and its effect. Commissioner Peterson expressed concern about the perceived change in the color of the electronic message as one travels past the sign. He asked if that would violate the restriction against the image changing more frequently then every 10 seconds, or be used as precedence allowing messages to change more frequently Mr. Lancaster indicated he would not interpret the proposed language to create such a problem. Bill Van De Bogart, with the Tukwila School District, addressed questions concerning color and how the image on the sign would change, he stated that all of the letters would change to amber. Mohammed Hassan, a citizen, was in favor of the message sign for communication, in multiple languages in the community REBUTTAL: None. Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 2006 Page 5 of 6 There were no further comments. The Public Hearing was closed. The Planning Commission Deliberated. Although they expressed some concerns, the majority of the Planning Commissioners stated their support for the project. Commissioner Arthur expressed concern over the proposed Code Amendments, indicating his opinion that the disadvantages of such changes outweigh the benefits. He indicated that throughout his tenure on the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission has attempted to minimize visual clutter and especially to limit such intrusions in neighborhoods. He believes this proposal would take the sign code in a different direction. He also expressed concern about treating public facilities differently from commercial uses. Chair Ekberg proposed looking at each item in the proposed ordinance individually to see if there were any changes. Several possible modifications were suggested. One suggestion was to specify that there could be "no perceived color change" on a message center. Chair Ekberg re-opened the public hearing at 9:33 pm in order to allow Commissioner Parrish to ask the applicant to address color and the language proposed by Chair Ekberg. Jacob Tilton, employed by a manufacturer electronic message center, stated that brightness or intensity would technically change the color of the text. He provided explanation of why the color appears to change even when the letters are all the same color. However, he has never had any experience with the color spectrum being an issue. Mr. Tilton recommended that the Planning Commission avoid anything that related to the actual message or the color of the text. He suggested focusing on the style or the timing issue, stating you should be able to read the full message in the time it takes to drive by once. The amount of time allowed for the image to change also dictates the size of the sign. If the sign is not large enough to include the entire message, then it's ineffective. ivfr. Tilton usually recommends one second per line of text because that's how quickly we can read and process data. Mr. Lancaster asked the Commission for clarification of their concern regarding the change in color when walking back and forth, while viewing the sign that was on display He stated that he could not support a clause that reads the perception in color cannot change, due to the extreme difficulty of enforcing such a request. There were no further comments. The re -opened Public Hearing was closed. The Planning Commission deliberated. It was determined that the prohibition against "perceived color change" should not be part of the ordinance. Chair Ekberg suggested a `Sunset Clause' (Item D) to read 'This ordinance change would sunset one year from date of implementation' Planning Commission Minutes June 22, 2006 Page 6 of 6 As explained by Mr. Lancaster, the proposed amendment would go away after one year if the City took no action and no new signs meeting these standards would be allowed. Existing signs that were lawfully erected under these provisions during that one year period would fall under section 19.300.30(a) and would be allowed to continue indefinitely as long as it is not destroyed to more than 50% of it's value. If so, it would need to be removed: No changes could occur to the sign as technology changes. The proposed new regulation could be reviewed a year later in lieu of a Sunset Clause. CHAIR EKBERG MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED BY STAFF WITH THE MODIFICATION THAT THE ORDINANCE SHALL SUNSET IN ONE YEAR. COMMISSIONER PARRISH SECONDED THE MOTION. FIVE VOTED IN FAVOR AND COVLIILSSIONER ARTHUR VOTED AGAINST. CHAIR EKBERG MADE A MOTION TO CONTINUE CASE NUMBER L06 -023 TO THE 7/27/06 PUBLIC HEARING. CONE IISSIONER MALINA SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL WERE IN FAVOR. Director's Report: Update on Sound Transit 1. Looking at doing a study of running light rail from Burien to Renton and potentially further East. 2. Full finding for completion of the sounder station at Longacres. 3. A proposal to make street and traffic improvements for access from the Eastside. 4. Provide shadow service for the Sounder bus services to connect the stations outside of the hours the trains are running. 5. Increase Sounder services up to 9 trips each direction. The City supports all of the proposed projects. Mall project update Meeting adjourned at 10:10 PM Submitted by Wynetta Bivens Secretary Public Facilities Eligib_le fo_r a,,,Cp. g Message Sign ,-I asaggr• m t P W ar c N__ J -ft ftl lim VI a rk. iii wine-ft-swats% i item mu.s. 1 it a A q \vr 1 niaTW j 2 'twi 4 jA, t 11 N''■_‘,.___Are Ns. 4 1 4 ‘,.‘tarc i a'aloPPart S ALL tic ta kibt =0441,10 tail,_ teratuls 2 i eret taTha S2= 1' 1 v. i it I .E.11_ i■ se i 1 -11.1" MislifirarIP--: \ss c k Rt 't "Maar a dufr., 4 a-4 1 0 em tb-w-. 1 1.1t(--4- -11 r t-- ...i_ 1 m Fram, e 1 I e.4 ••••-..E i "nu-- ---sisv 1 a reb VIIIIIT 4 s ar .111 r 'E 1 Al •er', aarESu Nit V ii r i a t it la 1------ MI-7,.- s 7 Ilk ftur-rairmili= ..7--•••• 1 ii vam. at All; le _M_NiAm_n_nr. ear 4.1 init 1 wt h 1----sawii I z yili• ill iii. a t .„-,_m_zsgia rt..„=„--\ k ,tit I th i ri -411:3U grae.A1 I -Eam ult F, II i llbik LH VIIIII- a7 ini R tot t tea in I I .r". irl 1110 1.4 ;I _IL-_,,- Ft 0,, svistullammagrar tt 1 1 i m ii l i r 1 I 1 1 1-1711- 1:■\;\ 1 I II li Wi liwarrlar so all 11 L dr.- /1 --../I WrLikk .1 II i I I lir 1 k 1_ •Tr :.-4—s. 7 A all 0 ijS a 4 Li LE 1 i r L••-_e_.-- „sr aillelair L d .•.'WSWM 1 4 f Z2 at i \r rilztUnm n- in _Mil _4.iir...... 44 f r t .,..t HI It H n i-,,,.. 1 1 m a f ti. 1 Mil 0