The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPermit L98-0042 - CITY OF TUKWILA - SIGN AMORTIZATION CODE AMENDMENTL98 -0042 CITY OF TUKWILA CODE AMENDMENT CHANGES COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (SIGN AMORTIZATION) City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commis • FROM: Michael Jenk' s ea7,1"- RE: Update on Sign mortization program DATE: July 1, 1999 Since the adoption of the Sign Amortization Ordinance in November 1998, staff has started implementing the ordinance. As you will recall, there were several key dates in the ordinance concerning the removal of both illegal and off - premises signs. Illegal signs were to be removed by June 30, 1999 while off - premises signs must be removed by June 30, 2000. In addition, the ordinance provided for businesses with numerous non - conforming on- premises signs to enter into an agreement with the City to remove the signs over time, past the December 31, 2001 full compliance date. This agreement, called a Voluntary Sign Reduction or VSR, must also be approved and executed by June 30, 2000. In February 1999 staff identified businesses with illegal signs. Notices have been sent to these businesses by Code Enforcement to remove these signs by June 30, 1999. As of the date of this memo, staff has not received a report or update as to the status of these illegal signs. Staff has identified all licensed businesses in Tukwila to begin the notification process about the ordinance and key dates. Staring June 15 and lasting approximately 6 weeks, staff will send letters to businesses in residential zones, commercially zoned businesses and businesses that were identified in the 1997 sign inventory. Attached with this memo are copies of letters now being sent to these businesses. In addition, staff has published notices in local publications about the ordinance with key dates summarized and other pertinent information. Copies of these Notices have also been attached. Finally, the City has added information on Sign Amortization to its Home Page. The page includes information on the program, graphic examples of non - conforming signage, Sign Permit and VSR applications and other pertinent information about the program. Copies of screens from the Home Page are also attached. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard. Suite #100 • Tukwila. Washlnnton 98188 • (2061431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431 -3665 June 15, 1999 City of Tukvvila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director ONIEWPiParilibt Tukwila, Wa 98188 Re: Sign Code Requirements T Whom It May Concern; • 'To 1144,041600E* ki IZe OPpCNluvr ?eNEs On November 23, 1998, the Tukwila City Council adopted Ordinance 1857, creating a Sign Amortization program. This Sign Amortization Ordinance, effective January 1, 1999, requires all permanent wall or freestanding signs in the City of Tukwila to meet the requirements of the Sign Code (Tukwila Municipal Code Title 19) by December 31, 2001. A copy of the Ordinance is enclosed. Also enclosed with this letter is a summary of sign requirements for uses in a residential zone. In addition, there are different sign requirements for different residential zones. The information sheet in your packet is based upon your zone. If you believe that you are in a different residential zone than what is indicated on the handout or if you have any questions about signs for your business, please contact the Department of Community Development at (206) 431 -3670 or email us at tuksign @ci.tukwila.wa.us. Over the next several months, you will receive additional letters and informational mailers to provide pertinent information on the program and to highlight key dates that may affect you and your business. Thank you for your efforts and cooperation in complying with this ordinance designed to help in Tukwila's long- standing efforts to improve its community. Sincerely, Michael Jenkins Associate Planner C: ... outreach \6 -1 res 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431 -3665 ° �.2 July 6, 1999 City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director T3uy1 cy Nom_ IN 11'r7 I ivBi fl xy To Tukwila Business Owners On November 23, 1998, the Tukwila City Council adopted Ordinance 1857, creating a Sign Amortization program. The Sign Amortization Ordinance, effective January 1, 1999, requires all permanent wall or freestanding signs in the City of Tukwila to meet the requirements in the Sign Code (Tukwila Municipal Code Title 19) by December 31, 2001. A copy of the Ordinance is enclosed. Also enclosed with this letter is a summary of sign requirements for uses in a Commercial Zone. Generally, each business is allowed one wall sign and one freestanding sign or two wall signs and no freestanding sign. There are other requirements if your business faces a residential zone that may not be included in this packet. If you believe your business faces a residential zone, please contact Department of Community Development staff at (206) 431 -3670 or email us at tuksign@ci.tukwila.wa.us for more information. Information on the Sign Amortization program is also available on our home page at www.ci.tukwila.wa.us. All property owners and their commercial tenants are required to comply with the Sign Amortization Ordinance by December 31, 2001. As part of the ordinance, property owners may be eligible for a Voluntary Sign Reduction (VSR) agreement that allows some signage to remain beyond the December 31, 2001 cutoff. Generally, businesses eligible for a VSR are those with numerous wall and/or freestanding signs on their property. All applications for a VSR must be reviewed, approved and executed between the Property Owner and City of Tukwila by June 30, 2000. If you believe that you may be eligible based upon numerous wall or freestanding signs, contact Department of Community Development staff at (206) 431 -3670. Over the next several months, you will receive additional letters and informational mailers to provide pertinent information on the program and to highlight key dates that may affect you and your business. Thank you for your efforts and cooperation in complying with this ordinance designed to help in Tukwila's long - standing efforts to improve its community. Sincerely, Michael Jenkins Associate Planner C:.. . outreach \6 -1 comm 6300 Southcenter Boulevard. Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington jY n�ton 98188 • (206J 431 -3670 • Fax: (206J 4,31-3665 July 6, 1999 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development UMMOI TUKWILA WA 98188 Re: Sign Amortization Ordinance To Whom It May Concern: John W Rants, Mayor Steve Lancaster, Director To 3u+rnt*e's. /N 1,,11 /NVGNi'otty On November 23, 1998, the Tukwila City Council adopted Ordinance 1857, creating a Sign Amortization program. The Sign Amortization Ordinance, effective January 1, 1999, requires all permanent wall or freestanding signs in the City of Tukwila to meet the requirements in the Sign Code (Tukwila Municipal Code Title 19) by December 31, 2001. A copy of the Ordinance is enclosed. Also enclosed with this letter is a summary of sign requirements for uses in a Commercial Zone. Generally, each business is allowed one wall sign and one freestanding sign or two wall signs and no freestanding sign. There are other requirements if your business faces a residential zone that may not be included in this packet. If you believe your business faces a residential zone, please contact Department of Community Development staff at (206) 431 -3670 or email us at tuksign a,ci.tukwila.wa.us for more information. Information on the Sign Amortization program is also available on our home page at www.ci.tukwila.wa.us. During the summer of 1997 Department of Community Development staff conducted a citywide inventory of signs, including yours, to determine the extent of non - conforming signs in Tukwila. At the time of this survey, it appeared that your business might not comply with the city's Sign Code for at least one of the following reasons: • There was more than one freestanding sign on the property • There was more than one wall sign on a wall • There was more than one wall sign and one freestanding sign • The area of the sign appeared larger than what the code allows • A wall sign extended above the roofline • A freestanding sign was taller than the building • A freestanding sign was too close to the road or property line, given the sign's perceived height If you would like to review the results of this survey as it pertains to your property or business, please contact Department of Community Development staff. C: ... outreach \6 -1 commx 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 All property owners and their commercial tenants are required to comply with the Sign Amortization Ordinance by December 31, 2001. As part of the ordinance, property owners may be eligible for a Voluntary Sign Reduction (VSR) agreement that allows some signage to remain beyond the December 31, 2001 cutoff. Generally, businesses eligible for a VSR are those with numerous wall and/or freestanding signs on their property. All applications for a VSR must be reviewed, approved and executed between the Property Owner and City of Tukwila by June 30, 2000. If you believe that you may be eligible based upon numerous wall or freestanding signs, contact Department of Community Development staff at (206) 431 -3670. Over the next several months, you will receive additional letters and informational mailers to provide pertinent information on the program and to highlight key dates that may affect you and your business. Thank you for your efforts and cooperation in complying with this ordinance designed to help in Tukwila's long - standing efforts to improve its community. Sincerely, ez.i.A744. Michael Jenkins Associate Planner �• Z, w 6 O 0• CO o U) W J CO L wo 2 • a, (o =d H W' =: zF- z F- w w Um o w w. f=. U LL 0. . Z o u) H I-, 0 z Manufacturing/ Industrial Center- Not affected by Ordinance http://www.ci.tukwila.wa.us/signs/map1.jpg Page 1 of 2 Tukwila City Hall So:uthcenter Mall 6/29/99 Page 1 of 1 Example of nonconforming wall signs Thereare too. many wall signs. Sign code. allows` 2-wall signswhen there is not a freestanding sign. If 2.walI signs aro.allowed, they havoc( he on separate walls and facing different directions. http://www.ci.tukvvila.wa.us/signs/nonconfl .j pg 6/29/99 , +- Page 1 of 1 Example of nonconforming .wall sign Sign is nonconforming because ▪ It is larger- than allowed in the sign :code. ▪ The allowed wall sign area is based on the size of wall on. which the sign is attached ▪ In'thisexample, the allowed sign area is 15 square feet http://vvww.ci.tulcwila.wa.us/signs/nonconf3.jpg 6/29/99 ' : �..�' z �W acat: J U U0 — F—. U 0 W Q u) 0 =a z F_ zo Lu U D O U 01— W W - U O Z W U 5.2: F-� 0 z Example of nonconformin freestanding sign 15.F$l . • Side. Walk ..•■•••••11"------4, 10 Feet is;nonconforming becauseit Page 1 of 1 ItTallarthan the building (must be same height or lower) • Too dose itt property lines ( must he set' back the samedistance as height) http://wvvw.ci.tulcwila.wa.us/signs/nonconajpg 6/29/99 < • • I I— Z UJ 6 -J (.) 0 ° U) W I --I !- CO u_ 0 L1< I a l-0 z I- 111 2 io w • z cu (.) 0 Example of nonconforming •freestanding sign 01—) 80' sf sign . ,4/1111ikk, Street '5 I. ilk I lc 1 1 Building Elevation View lillrdseye (Plan- View) Sign is nonconforming because the face is larger than allowed in the sign code. Allowed freestanding sign area is based on the width of the property. En this example, the allowed sign area would be 50 square feet. http://www.ci.tukwila.wa.us/signs/nonconf4jpg Page 1 of 1 6/29/99 `, City of Tukwila Washington Ordinance No. /8 iS % AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING PARTS OF ORDINANCE NO. 1274, AND AMENDING PARTS OF ORDINANCE NOS. 1768 AND 1792 AS CODIFIED AT TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 19, SIGN CODE; CREATING A STAGED COMPLIANCE SIGN AMORTIZATION PROGRAM; PROVIDING REMEDIES FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY; AMENDING DECISION REVIEW PROCESSES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that Tukwila has many non - conforming, pre - existing signs which are located in areas annexed to the City over the past ten years; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to implement Comprehensive Plan policies calling for an amortization plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council, through the adoption and implementation of the Pacific Highway Revitalization Plan, seeks to adopt changes to the Sign Code to improve the visual quality of this important part of Tukwila's business community; and WHEREAS, during a number of public meetings over the past six months, property owners and businesses have expressed dissatisfaction with sections of the existing Tukwila Sign Code which pertain to non - conforming signage; and WHEREAS, the City Council wants to establish a firm date of six months following adoption of this ordinance to require all illegal signs to be removed; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to provide businesses and property owners with a process to amortize non- conforming signs that is equitable yet flexible by giving property owners up to 7 -1/2 years to bring non - conforming signs into compliance; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. A new section is added to TMC 19.08, Definitions, as follows: 19.08.175 Premises. "Premises" means one or more contiguous lots of record (exclusive of any right -of -way), owned or managed by the same individual or entity. Section 2. Ordinance 1274 as codified at TMC 19.08.130 is amended to read as follows: 19.08.130 Off - premises sign. "Off-premises sign" means any sign which is not on the same premises as the business with which it is identified, or which cannot be classified as an on- premises sign under TMC 19.08.140. Section 3. Ordinance 1274 as codified at TMC 19.08.140 is amended to read as follows: 19.08.140 On- premises sign. "On- premises sign" means a sign which displays advertising copy specifically related to a primary use of the premises on which it is located, including signs or sign devices indicating the business transacted at, services rendered, goods sold or produced on the immediate premises, name of the business, person, firm or corporation occupying the premises, including signs with adjustable copy known as readerboards. Said sign must be on the same premises as the business with which it is identified. SIGNAMRT.DOC 11/30/1998 .1 z ~w o o u) o; wz N u_ w 0 gQ = c5 w z �. F- o zF- w w U � 0 w- uj o wz U N, —I O ~ z Section 4. Ordinance Nos. 1274 and 1792, as codified at TMC 19.12.050A.2. (Exceptions - Permits Not Required), are amended to read as follows: 2. Repainting or cleaning of an advertising structure shall not be considered an erection or alteration which requires a sign permit unless: a. a structural or electrical change is made; or b. the area or the shape of the sign is altered; or c. except as provided in subsection (1) above, there is a change in the advertising copy or message on any sign located in either the Manufacturing /Industrial Center —Light (MIC /L) District or the Manufacturing /Industrial Center —Heavy (MIC /H) District (as they are established and identified under Title 18 of the Tukwila Municipal Code). Section 5. Ordinance 1274, as codified at TMC 19.28.030 and 19.28.040, is amended to read as follows: 19.28.030 Non - conforming Signs in the MIC /L and MIC /H Districts. Any non - conforming sign located in either the Manufacturing /Industrial Center —Light (MIC /L) District or the Manufacturing /Industrial Center —Heavy (MIC /H) which was erected prior to May 28, 1973, or which was erected legally in accordance with the provisions of the sign ordinance in effect at the time of erection, or which has a valid building permit from the City, may remain in use until such time as: 1. There is a change in use of the land, building or tenant space within a building that the sign identifies; or 2. There are substantial alterations or enlargements to the site or building exterior upon which the non- conforming sign is located requiring issuance of a license or permit from the City; or 3 There is a change in the letter style, size, color, background, message or sign structure which requires manufacturing of a new or modified sign face or structure. At such time, any non - conforming permanent sign shall be brought into conformance with the requirements of this code or shall be removed. Exceptions: Easily replaceable bills and letters as in the case of a readerboard requiring no new investment in the sign shall not be considered modification of a non - conforming sign. Modifications not requiring a permit as provided in TMC 19.12.050.A.1 and 19.12.050.A.2 shall not be considered modification of a non - conforming sign. 19.28.040 Closure and vacation of business —time limit for sign removal in the MIC /L and MIC /H Districts. Upon closure and vacation of a business or activity located in either the Manufacturing /Industrial . Center Light (MIC /L) District or the Manufacturing /Industrial Center Heavy (MIC /H), the owner of said business or activity shall have 30 days from the date of closure to remove all signs relating to the business or activity. If the owner of the business or activity fails to remove the signs within the designated time limit, then the owner of the property upon which the signs are located shall remove the signs within 60 days of the closure and vacation of the premises. If the owner of the property on which the signs are located fails to remove the signs within 60 days, then the Planning Director upon due notice may remove the signs at the owner's expense. Section 6. A new TMC Chapter 19.30,.Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program, is hereby created to read as follows: 19.30.010 General. The Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program is a phased program designed to bring all signage in the City of Tukwila into conformance within a defined time period. The ordinance was adopted on November 23, 1998, and its effective date is January, 1, 1999. All decisions regarding the Staged Sign. Amortization Program are Type 2 decisions under TMC 18.104.O10C and may be appealed to the Planning Commission under TMC Chapter 18.116. For the purposes of Chapter 19.30, any legally erected wall sign that is existing as of January 1, 1999 and which exceeds sign code standards as to sign area by, 15% or less shall be deemed to be conforming. Any legally erected freestanding sign that is existing as of January 1, 1999 and which exceeds sign code standards as to sign area, height and location by 15% or less shall be deemed to be conforming. SIGNAMRT.DOC 11/30/1998 2 zz Z ~w U O': w= J H wo g 5. u. cd w z� �o w1-: w U U o U o t-- 1 U. 1- - U � O z 19.30.015 Chapter Application. The provisions of Chapter 19.30, Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program, will apply throughout all use districts in the City of Tukwila with the exception of the Manufacturing /Industrial Center —Light (MIC /L) District and the Manufacturing /Industrial Center —Heavy (MIC /H) District (as they are established and identified under Title 18 of the Tukwila Municipal Code). 19.30.020 Removal - non - conforming off - premises signs. All non - conforming signs which are off - premises at the time of the adoption of the staged compliance ordinance must be removed or brought into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards within 18 months after the date of the adoption of the ordinance. This length of time, known as the compliance period for non - conforming off - premises signs, expires on June 30, 2000. Any freestanding sign that becomes non - conforming due to a change in ownership or management of a premises such that the sign no longer meets the definition of an on- premises sign (under TMC 19.08.140) must be removed within six months of such change in ownership or management. 19.30.030 Removal - non - conforming on- premises signs. A. All non - conforming signs which are on- premises at the time of the adoption of the staged compliance ordinance must be removed or brought into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards within the three -year base amortization period. The base amortization period begins on January 1, 1999 and expires on December 31, 2001. Businesses entering into a Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement ( "VSR ") will be allowed additional time beyond the base amortization period. B. The VSR Agreement is an agreement between a land owner and the City of Tukwila regarding non- conforming on- premises signage. This agreement allows an extended time period of a specified length to either remove this signage or bring it into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards. 19.30.040 Voluntary sign reduction agreements. Any non - conforming on- premises sign covered by a VSR agreement will be allowed an extended compliance period beyond the three -year base amortization period. Applications are available from the Department of Community Development and will be processed free of charge. The application deadline will be established by staff. The approval and execution of all VSR's will occur no later than June 30, 2000. The implementation deadline for all approved and executed VSR's is December 31, 2001. 19.30.050 Extended compliance periods under Voluntary Sign Reduction agreement. The extended compliance period for non - conforming on- premises signs covered by a Voluntary Sign Reduction agreement is determined using the percent of reduction formula. This formula reflects the reduction in non - conforming signage on a premises (expressed as a percentage) as of December 31, 2001. It is used on a per premises basis to determine the extended compliance period for non - conforming on- premises signs. The reduction in the total square footage of all non - conforming signage to be reduced is divided by the total square footage of all non - conforming signage. A 15% bonus is added to the resulting percentage for each non - conforming freestanding sign (if any) which has been removed or brought into compliance. PERCENT OF REDUCTION EQUALS: Total non - conforming square footage reduced per the VSR Agreement, divided by the total non - conforming square footage before reduction A 15% bonus for each non - conforming plus freestanding sign removed or made conforming (if applicable) under the terms of the VSR The percent of reduction figure is then applied to a sliding scale, which establishes the duration of the extended compliance period, as follows. • ESTABLISHING THE EXTENDED COMPLIANCE PERIOD PERCENT OF REDUCTION USING FORMULA DURATION OF EXTENDED COMPLIANCE PERIOD Less than 30% Not eligible for extended compliance period At least 30% but not more than 45% 4.5 years (base amortization + 1.5 years) At least 45% but not more than 60% 6 years (base amortization + 3 years) At least 60% and higher 7.5 years (base amortization + 4.5 years) 19.30.060 Substitution of signage under VSR agreements. Existing on- premises signage may be substituted with other new or existing signage, so long as the substitution is part of a total reduction in non - conforming signage on the premises. Such substitution must be under the terms and conditions of an approved VSR Agreement and will require a permit. Substitution permits will be issued by the Department of Community Development as a Type 2 Decision under TMC 18.104.OIOC.. SIGNAMRT.DOC 11/30/1998 „+ 3 z w Ce 00 (0 a. LU J =' w O: gQ cn =a �w z= I- O z U O P: O I -' ww H U .. z. w U =. o 1- z Substitution permits are subject to the compliance period stated in the applical;, VSR Agreement. At the end of the compliance period, all signs on the premises must be in conformance with the Tukwila Sign Code. 19.30.070 Nuisance. All non - conforming and illegal signs must be brought into conformance within the applicable compliance period. Any sign which remains illegal or non - conforming beyond the expiration date of the applicable compliance period is hereby declared to be a nuisance and is subject to the terms, conditions and penalties of TMC Chapter 8.45, Enforcement. 19.30.080 Remedies - abatement. The remedies provided herein for failure to comply with the provisions of this chapter, whether civil or criminal, shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to any other remedies provided by law including legal or equitable relief to enjoin and /or abate a violation of this chapter. The costs incurred by the City in abating a violation of this chapter, including reasonable attorneys' fees, shall be borne by the party responsible for maintaining the violation. 19.30.090 Maintenance and repair. Nothing in this chapter shall relieve the owner or user of a non - conforming sign from the provisions of this code regarding safety, maintenance and repair of signage. 19.30.100 Reserved. Section 7. Ordinance 1768 as codified at TMC 18.104.010C is amended to add the review processes for VSR agreements, as follows: TMC 18.104.010C Type 2 Decisions Type of Permit Initial Decision Maker Appeal Body (open record appeal) Substitution of Signage under VSR Agreements (TMC 19.30.060) Community Development Director Planning Commission Section 8. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause 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 9. Effective Date. This ordinance becomes effective on January 1, 1999. PASSED BY THE CITY COU CI�I I,, OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Special Meeting thereof this .1 L-‘1 day of `T (-.d -74ce .t'<..e , 1998. ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: e E. Cantu, City Clerk APPROVED AS T-e-F By Off ce of the City Attor RM: FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: l /// y' c S. 1�t` J) PASSED BY THE ITY COUNCIL: /i/,{ �J2{ p PUBLISHED: ///.2 7/ ?f EFFECTIVE DATE: //� // % j ORDINANCE NO.: /S,5% SIGNAMRT.DOC 11/30/1998 4 z =z uai JU o O' { p. WI wO u. I"a I" F- _ w z �. zo tu 0 0 1- -' w Lu LL. liF72; Z U — _ O ~. z RECEIVED DEC 1 0 1998 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMO TO: Barbara Saxton FROM: Deb Ritter DATE: November 24, 1998 RE: Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program'Ordinance The City Council adopted this ordinance during its special meeting on November 23, 1998. I have enclosed a "redline" copy (showing the last set of council revisions before adoption) and a "clean" copy (incorporating these revisions). The "clean" copy represents the ordinance as it was adopted on November 23. Bob Baker suggested that I provide you with a diskette plus hard copies so you can make any needed adjustments to format, etc. Would you ask Jane to provide Planning with the final executed copy of the ordinance at her earliest convenience? If you have any questions, please contact me at 1663. cc: Steve Lancaster (w /attachments) Jack Pace (w /attachments) 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 � z ��- • z re w 6 O 0 co 0 w =: w• 0 �Q. �d � w Z= z F- w ul !O w • w` O w z. O z AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING PARTS OF ORDINANCE NO. 1274, AND AMENDING PARTS OF ORDINANCE NOS. 1768 AND 1792 AS CODIFIED AT TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 19, SIGN CODE; CREATING A STAGED COMPLIANCE SIGN AMORTIZATION PROGRAM; PROVIDING REMEDIES FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY; AMENDING DECISION REVIEW PROCESSES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. z mow. ce WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that Tukwila has many non - conforming, pre - existing 6 signs which are located in areas annexed to the City over the past ten years; and o O 0 WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to implement Comprehensive Plan policies 8.1.11 and w 1.- Y p P 0) w 8.1.15, calling for an amortization plan — and —the preservation of signs that are ti i a _an w0 significant"; and ga WHEREAS, the City Council, through the adoption and implementation of the Pacific Highway U a Revitalization Plan, seeks to adopt changes to the Sign Code to improve the visual quality of this w important part of Tukwila's business community; and z 1- 1- o z i--. Lu WHEREAS, during a number of public meetings over the past six months, property owners and g businesses have expressed dissatisfaction with sections of the existing Tukwila Sign Code which pertain v 0 to non- conforming signage; and o F-. ww WHEREAS, the City Council wants to establish a firm date of six months following adoption of this ordinance to require all illegal signs to be removed; and z w WHEREAS, the City wishes to provide businesses and property owners with a process to amortize non - conforming signs that is equitable yet flexible by giving property owners up to 7 -1/2 years to bring non - conforming signs into compliance; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. A new section is added to TMC 19.08, Definitions, as follows: 19.08.171 Premises. "Premises" means one or more contiguous lots of record (exclusive of any right -of -way), owned or managed by the same individual or entity. Section 2. Ordinance 1274 as codified at TMC 19.08.130 is amended to read as follows: 19.08.130 Off - premises sign. "Off- premises sign" means any sign which is not on the same premises as the business with which it is identified, .or which cannot be classified as an on- premises sign under TMC 19.08.140. SIGNAMT4.DOC 11/23/1998 1 Section 3. Ordinance 1274 as codified at TMC 19.08.140 is amended to read as follows: 19.08.140 On- premises sign. "On premises sign" means a sign which displays advertising copy specifically related to a primary use of the premises on which it is located, including signs or sign devices indicating the business transacted at, services rendered, goods sold or produced on the immediate premises, name of the business, person, firm or corporation occupying the premises, including signs with adjustable copy known as readerboards. Said sign must be on the same premises as the business with which it is identified. Section 4. Ordinance Nos. 1274 and 1792, as codified at TMC 19.12.050A.2. (Exceptions - Permits Not Required), are amended to read as follows: 2. Repainting or cleaning of an advertising structure shall not be considered an erection or alteration which requires a sign permit unless: a. a structural or electrical change is made; or b. the area or the shape of the sign is altered. or: c, except as provided in subsection (1). above, there is a change in the advertising copy or message on any sign located in either the Manufacturing /Industrial Center - Light (MIC /L) District or the Manufacturing /Industrial Center - Heavy (MIC /H) District (as they are established and identified under Title 18 of the Tukwila Municipal Code). Section 5. Ordinance 1274, as codified at TMC 19.28.030 and 19.28.040, is amended to read as follows,hereby repealed. 19.28,030 Non - Conforming Signs in the MIC /L and MiC /H Districts. Any non - conforming sign located in either the Manufacturing /Industrial Center Light (MIC /L) District or the Manufacturing /Industrial Center Heavy (MIC /H) which was erected prior to May 28, 1973, or which was erected legally in accordance with the provisions of the sign ordinance in effect at the time of erection, or which has a valid building permit from the City may remain in use until such time as: 1. There is a change in use of the land, building or tenant -space within a building that the sign identifies; or 2. There are substantial alterations or enlargements to the site or building exterior upon which the non- conforming sign is located requiring issuance of a license or permit from the City;ar 3. There is a change in the letter style, size, color, background, message or sign structure which requires manufacturing of a new or modified sign face or structure. At such time. any non - conforming permanent sign shall be brought into conformance with the requirements of this code or shall he removed. Exceptions: Easily replaceable bills and letters as in the case of a readerboard requiring no new investment in the sign shall not be considered modification of a non - conforming sign. -signs Modifications not requiring a permit as provided in TMC 19.12.050.1,.1 and 19.12.050.2 shall not be considered modification of a non - conforming sign. At such time, any non conforming peraxe .. - . • . c requirements of this code or shall -be reneved. 19.28.040 Closure and vacation of business - Time limit for sign removal in the MiC /L and MiC /H Districts. Upon closure and vacation of a business or activity located in either the Manufacturing /Industrial Center Light (MIC /L) District or the Manufacturing /industrial Center Heavy (MIC /H), the owner of said business or activity shall have 30 days from the date of closure to remove all signs relating SIGNAMT4.DOC 11/23/1998 2 to the business or activity. If the owner of the business or activity fails to remove the signs within the designated time limit, then the owner of the property upon which the signs are located shall remove the signs within 60 days of the closure and vacation of the premises. If the owner of the property on which the signs are located fails to remove the signs within 60 days, then the Planning Director upon due notice may remove the signs at the owner's expense. Section 6. A new TMC Chapter 19.30, Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program, is hereby created to read as follows: 19.30.010 General. The Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program is a phased program designed to bring all signage in the City of Tukwila into conformance within a defined time period. The ordinance was adopted on November 23 1998 and its effective date i. January 1, 1999. All decisions regarding the Staged Sign Amortization Program are Type 2 decisions under TMC 18.104.010C and may be appealed to the Planning Commission under TMC Chapter 18.116. For the purposes of Chapter 19.30, any legally erected wall sign that is existing as of January 1, 1999 and which exceeds sign code standards as to sign area by 15% or less shall be deemed to be conforming. Any legally erected freestanding sign that is existing as of January 1, 1999 and which exceeds sign code standards as to sign area, height and location by 15% or less shall be deemed to be conforming, 19.30.015 Chapter Application. The provisions of Chapter 19,30, Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program, will apply throughout all use districts in the City of Tukwila with the exception of the Manufacturing /Industrial Center - Light (MIC /L) District and the Manufacturing /Industrial Center - Heavy (MIC /H) District (as they are established and identified under Title 18 of the Tukwila Municipal Code). 19.30.020 Removal - non - conforming off - premises signs. All non- conforming signs which are off - premises at the time of the adoption of the staged compliance ordinance must be removed or brought into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards within 18 months after the date of the adoption of the ordinance. This length of time, known as the compliance period for non - conforming off - premises signs, expires on June 30, 2000. Any freestanding sign that becomes non - conforming due to a change in ownership or management of a premises such that the sign no longer meets the definition of an on- premises sign (under TMC 19.08.140) must be removed within six months of such change in ownership or management. 19.30.030 Removal - non - conforming on- premises signs. A. All non - conforming signs which are on- premises at the time of the adoption of the staged compliance ordinance must be removed or brought into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards within the three -year base amortization period. The base amortization period begins on January 1, 1999 and expires on December 31, 2001. Businesses entering into a Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement ( "VSR ") will be allowed additional time beyond the base amortization period. B. The VSR Agreement is an agreement between a land owner and the City of Tukwila regarding non - conforming on- premises signage. This agreement allows an extended time period of a specified length to either remove this signage or bring it into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards. 19.30.040 Voluntary sign reduction agreements. Any non - conforming on- premises sign covered by a VSR agreement will be allowed an extended compliance period beyond the three -year base amortization period. Applications are available from the Department of Community Development and will be processed free of charge. The application deadline will be established by staff. The approval and execution of all VSR's will occur no later than June 30, 2000. The implementation deadline for all approved and executed VSR's is December 31, 2001. 19.30.050 Extended compliance periods under Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement. The extended compliance period for non - conforming on- premises signs covered by a Voluntary Sign Reduction agreement is determined using the percent of reduction formula. This formula reflects the reduction in non- conforming signage on a premises (expressed as a percentage) as of December 31, 2001. It is used on a per premises basis to determine the extended compliance period for non- SIGNAMT4.DOC 11/23/1998 3 conforming on- premises signs. The reduction in the total square footage of all non - conforming signage to be reduced is divided by the total square footage of all non- conforming signage. A 15% bonus is added to the resulting percentage for each non- conforming freestanding sign (if any) which has been removed or brought into compliance. PERCENT OF REDUCTION EQUALS: Total non - conforming square footage reduced per the VSR Agreement, divided by the total non - conforming square footage before reduction A 15% bonus for each non- plus conforming freestanding sign removed or made conforming (if applicable) under the terms of the VSR The percent of reduction figure is then applied to a sliding scale, which establishes the duration of the extended compliance period, as follows. ESTABLISHING THE EXTENDED COMPLIANCE PERIOD PERCENT OF REDUCTION USING FORMULA DURATION OF EXTENDED COMPLIANCE PERIOD Less than 30% Not eligible for extended compliance period At least 30% but not more than 45% 4.5 years (base amortization + 1.5 years) At least 45% but not more than 60% 6 years (base amortization + 3 years) At least 60% and higher 7.5 years (base amortization + 4.5 years) 19.30.060 Substitution of signage under VSR agreements. Existing on- premises signage may be substituted with other new or existing signage, so long as the substitution is part of a total reduction in non - conforming signage on the premises. Such substitution must be under the terms and conditions of an approved VSR Agreement and will require a permit. Substitution permits will be issued by the Department of Community Development as a Type 2 Decision under TMC 18.104.OIOC. Substitution permits are subject to the compliance period stated in the applicable VSR Agreement. At the end of the compliance period, all signs on the premises must be in conformance with the Tukwila Sign Code. 19.30.070 Nuisance. All non - conforming and illegal signs must be brought into conformance within the applicable compliance period. Any sign which remains illegal or non - conforming beyond the expiration date of the applicable compliance period is hereby declared to be a nuisance and is subject to the terms, conditions and penalties of TMC Chapter 8.45, Enforcement. 19.30.080 Remedies - abatement. The remedies provided herein for failure to comply with the provisions of this chapter, whether civil or criminal, shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to any other remedies provided by law including legal or equitable relief to enjoin and /or abate a violation of this chapter. The costs incurred by the City in abating a violation of this chapter, including reasonable attorneys' fees, shall be borne by the party responsible for maintaining the violation. 19.30.090 Maintenance and repair. Nothing in this chapter shall relieve the owner or user of a non- conforming sign from the provisions of this code regarding safety, maintenance and repair of signage. 19.30.100 Reserved. Section 7. Ordinance 1768 as codified at TMC 18.104.010C is amended to add the review processes for VSR agreements, as follows: SIGNAMT4.DOC 11/23/1998 4 z ~w 6 JU 0 N p cn w J= �LL w0 2 u. co =w I_ = zF r— O zt- w w 0 0- of w w` 1--0. z w U= 0E- z TMC 18.104.O10C Type 2 Decisions Type of Permit Initial Decision Maker Appeal Body (open record appeal) Substitution of Signage under VSR Agreements (TMC 19.30.060) Community Development Director Planning Commission Section 8. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause 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 9. Effective Date. This ordinance becomes effective on January 1, 1999or a summary thereof chall be publish- : - • • :er-ef-the-GityTaa lication as- provided -by -law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this 23rd day of November, 1998. John W. Rants, Mayor ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: Jane E. Cantu, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By Office of the City Attorney FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO.: SIGNAMT4.DOC 11/23/1998 5 z �w cc O 0. i 0 W= I- w0 2 J LL. Q' =a i. z� �0 Z F-- 2 O • N. ❑ E-. ww "-- 0 wz U� 0 z MEMO To: Steve Lancaster From: Deb Ritter Date: November 20, 1998 Re: Implementation of the Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program Recommendation: Hire a project manager to develop and administer the program during the first 18 months. The individual would perform the following functions: Design, construct and maintain a database to be used throughout the life of the Amortization Program. Verify and expand the existing inventory of non - conforming signs. Enter this information into program database. Develop a variety of work products in coordination with the City Attorney and Code Enforcement. Issue notification and reminder letters on a schedule appropriate for each affected business. Document legal notifications. Generate status reports for DCD and Code Enforcement. Administer VSR pre - applications, applications and agreements. Review and approve supporting documentation for VSR implementation. Review and approve substitution permits under VSR Agreements. • Work with Code Enforcement to coordinate program monitoring and enforcement. • • • Promote compliance with the program, serving as a liaison between the business community and City. Provide outreach and education materials, conduct open houses or special presentations as needed. Process regular sign permit applications. Coordinate the work of other staff members and /or interns who have been assigned to assist during the implementation phase. Background Attached is a sample timeline based on the dates provided in the ordinance. The timeline identifies the work products and tasks necessary to implement the program while satisfying the deadlines identified in that ordinance. The wide variety and number of tasks required to administer the program requires a program manager, supplemented, on a periodic basis, by one or more interns or staff members. The most demanding time period is the first 18 months of the program. By July 2000, the program will be up and running and all VSR's will be approved and executed. At this point, it could be hoped that we could "take a breather" and re- evaluate staffing needs for the next major phase of the program (which deals with the implementation of all VSR's by January, 2002). ..... z Z' Et a; JU U0 CO tU LLJ J CO LL u O 2 ga 5.9-a zF- 1- 0 Z r' IA CU U 0; ip CI I- W W, H U U. _p Z:. W U =:. o z SAMPLE TIMELINE FOR AMORTIZATION PROGRAM January 1999 Hire Project Manager Establish administrative deadlines and turnaround time for program, estimate staffing needs Work with City Attorney and Code Enforcement regarding parameters and guidelines (should burden be placed on business to prove conformity?) (verify marginal non - conformity ?) (verify implementation of VSR's?) February 1999 Design and construct database (using Access and Excel) to generate notification letters, VSR's, mailing labels and status reports reflect status of signs for each business: such as illegal, off - premises, marginal non - conformity, amount of non - conformity, amount of•reduction in non - conformity, VSR length) Develop VSR Agreement and notification letter (work with City Attorney) Develop reminder and violation letters (work with Code Enforcement) Create materials for information packet (letter, timeline, VSR pre -app, app & required attachments, app for substitution under VSR, amended sign code, resources for applicant, samples) Set up Sierra screens, entry codes March and April 1999 Verify and expand existing inventory Enter inventory data into database Outreach to community and special interest groups (articles, newsletters, presentations, open houses) Initial status report generated May 1999 Assemble info packets Mail info packets to all on non - conforming list (or to all licensed businesses ?) (all sign companies ?) Mail special letters to all with illegal signs (gives them 60 days to remove by 6/30/1999) June 1999 Respond to community questions and concerns July 1999 Code enforcement begins for all illegal signs not removed by 6/30/1999 August - December 1999 Respond to community questions and concerns (typical seasonal increase in number of regular sign permit applications processed) January 2000 Pre - application packets mailed for VSR's Begin scheduling VSR pre -app appointments (all VSR's to be approved and executed by 6/30/2000) February 2000 VSR pre -app appointments March 2000 Mail reminder letters - off - premises signs must be conforming by 6/30/2000 Approval and execution of VSR's April - June 2000 Approval and execution of VSR's by 6/30/2000 DRAFT 11/20/98 1 July 2000 Code enforcement begins for all non - conforming off - premises signs not removed by 6/30/2000 August 2000 -June 2001 On -going - continue monitoring July 2001 Mail reminder letters - VSR's must be implemented by 12/31/01 August - September 2001 Implementation of VSR's October - November 2001 Mail reminder letters - full compliance by 12/31/01 for businesses without VSR's Implementation of VSR's December 2001 Deadline for implementation of VSR's Deadline for full compliance for businesses without VSR's January 2002 Code enforcement begins for all non - conforming signs not covered by VSR's Code enforcement begins for VSR's not implemented (VSR's withdrawn ?) DRAFT 11/20/98 2 " z a z 1-=' EC 2 0 0 i (f) 0 w= J I— w O, g = 0: I-w Z= t-. I- O. Zr 0o 0tH: 0 H; uw w� z 1- V U. 111 Z co p:_ Z. r, STAGED COMPLIANCE SIGN AMORTIZATION ORDINANCE SAMPLE TIMELINE End of Full compliance date amortization period for properties not subject Aggressive action for non -conforming to VSR's* (end of Base Full Compliance Date Full Compliance Date Full Compliance Date on illegal signs off -premises signs Amortization Period) for 30% VSR's* for 45% VSR's* . for 60% VSR's* 6/30/99 6/30/00 12J31/01 6/30/03 12/31/04 6/30/06 YEARS' 0 0.5 1.5 3.0 4.5 6.0 7.5 "Staged Compliance" Last date for Deadline for FULL COMPLIANCE Ordinance Adopted approval & implementation WITH TUKWILA 1/1/99 execution of of VSR's* SIGN CODE VSR's* 12/31/01 6/30/00 * Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreements 7/23/98 DRAFT • NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. City of l a W ila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director TO: Mayor Rants FROM: Steve Lancaster MEMO DATE: November 18, 1998 RE: Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Ordinance Attached for City Council adoption are copies of the proposed Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Ordinance (one copy is a "redline" version showing the requested revisions and the other is a "clean" copy incorporating these revisions). The revisions reflect Council deliberations and direction at its November 9th COW meeting. Staff will continue to work on those items (also discussed on November 9th) that are outside the scope of the proposed ordinance. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 ? z F-Z CLw U U O; UJ J CO LL wO g =a z= F. I- o: z w 2 O D: 2t w 1- U' 0 z. Cu U -°2. rz O z AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING PARTS OF ORDINANCE NO. 1274, AND AMENDING PARTS OF ORDINANCE NOS. 1768 AND 1792 AS CODIFIED AT TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 19, SIGN CODE; CREATING A STAGED COMPLIANCE SIGN AMORTIZATION PROGRAM; PROVIDING REMEDIES FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY; AMENDING DECISION REVIEW PROCESSES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that Tukwila has many non - conforming, pre- existing signs which are located in areas annexed to the City over the past ten years; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to implement Comprehensive Plan policies 8-.17-i-4—and- . 81.15, calling for an amortization plan `b ^ifaa '• and � . • • WHEREAS, the City Council, through the adoption and implementation of the Pacific Highway Revitalization Plan, seeks to adopt changes to the Sign Code to improve the visual quality of this important part of Tukwila's business community; and WHEREAS, during a number of public meetings over the past six months, property owners and businesses have expressed dissatisfaction with sections of the existing Tukwila Sign Code which pertain to non - conforming signage; and WHEREAS, the City Council wants to establish a firm date of six months following adoption of this ordinance to require all illegal signs to be removed; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to provide businesses and property owners with a process to amortize non - conforming signs that is equitable yet flexible by giving property owners up to 7 -1/2 years to bring non - conforming signs into compliance; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. A new section is added to TMC 19.08, Definitions, as follows: 19.08.171 Premises. "Premises" means one or more contiguous lots of record (exclusive of any right -of -way), owned or managed by the same individual or entity. Section 2. Ordinance 1274 as codified at TMC 19.08.130 is amended to read as follows: 19.08.130 Off - premises sign. "Off- premises sign" means any sign which is not on the same premises as the business with which it is identified,.or which cannot be classified as an on- premises sign under TMC 19.08.140. SIGNAMT4.DOC 11/18/1998 1 Section 3. Ordinance 1274 as codified at TMC 19.08.140 is amended to read as follows: 19.08.140 On- premises sign. "On-premises sign" means a sign which displays advertising copy specifically related to a primary use of the premises on which it is located, including signs or sign. devices indicating the business transacted at, services rendered, goods sold or produced on the immediate premises, name of the business, person, firm or corporation occupying the premises, including signs with adjustable copy known as readerboards. Said sign must be on the same premises as the business with which it is identified. Section 4. Ordinance Nos. 1274 and 1792, as codified at TMC 19.12.050A.2. (Exceptions - Permits Not Required), are amended to read as follows: 2. Repainting or cleaning of an advertising structure shall not be considered an erection or alteration which requires a sign permit unless: a. a structural or electrical change is made; or b. the area or the shape of the sign is altered; or- c. except as provided in subsection (1). above, there is a change in the advertising copy or message on any sign Jocated neither the Manufacturing/Industrial Center - Light (MIC /L) District Qr.the Manufacturing /industrial Center - Heavy (MIC /H) District (as they are established and identified under Title 18 of the Tukwila Municipal Code). Section 5. Ordinance 1274, as codified at TMC 19.28.030 and 19.28.040, is amended to read as follows :her-e135.-repealed; 19.28.030 Non - Conforming Signs in the MIC/L and MIC/H Districts. Any non - conforming sign located in either the Manufacturing /Industrial Center Light (MIC/L) District or the Manufacturing /Industrial Center Heavy (MIC /H) which was erected prior to May 28, 1973, or which was erected legally in accordance with the provisions of the sign ordinance in effect at the time of erection, or which has a valid building permit from the City may remain in use until such time as: 1. There is a change in use of the land, building or tenant -space within a building that the sign identifies; or 2. There are substantial alterations or enlargements to the site or building exterior upon which the non - conforming sign is located requiring issuance of a license or permit from the City;_or 3. There is a change in the letter style, size, color, background, message or sign structure which requires manufacturing of a new or modified sign face or structure. ich e •1 -con o mi ern ent i n shill •e •r• 1 ht in o co farm nce .'th requirements of this code or shall be removed, Exceptions: Easily replaceable bills and letters as in the case of a readerboard requiring no new investment in the sign shall not be considered modification of a non - conforming sign. Signs Modifications not requiring a permit as provided in TMC 19.12.050.x.1 and 19.12.050.A.2 shall not be considered modification of a non - conforming sign. At such time, any non conforming permanent ehan b Fereoved7 de or shall be 19.28.040 Closure and vacation of business - Time limit for sign removal in the MIC /L and MIC/H Districts. Upon closure and vacation of a business or activity located in either the Manufacturing /Industrial Center Light (MIC /L) District or the Manufacturing /Industrial Center Heavy (MIC /H), the owner of said business or activity shall have 30 days from the date of closure to remove all signs relating SIGNAMT4.DOC 11/18/1998 2 to the business or activity. If the owner of the business or activity fails to remove the signs within the designated time limit, then the owner of the property upon which the signs are located shall remove the signs within 60 days of the closure and vacation of the premises. If the owner of the property on which the signs are located fails to remove the signs within 60 days, then the Planning Director upon due notice may remove the signs at the owner's expense. Section 6. A new TMC Chapter 19.30, Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program, is hereby created to read as follows: 19.30.010 General. The Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program is a phased program designed to bring all signage in the City of Tukwila into conformance within a defined time period. The ordinance was adopted on November 23, 1998 and its effective date iaJanuary 1, 1999. All decisions regarding the Staged Sign Amortization Program are Type 2 decisions under TMC 18.104.010C and may be appealed to the Planning Commission under TMC Chapter 18.116. For the purposes of Chapter 19.30, any legally erected wall sign that is existing as of January 1, 1999 and which exceeds sign code standards as to sign area by 15% or less shall be deemed to be conforming. Any legally erected freestanding sign that is existing as of January 1, 1999 and which exceeds sign code standards as to sign area, height and location by 15% or less shall be deemed to be conforming, 19.30.015 Chapter Application. zz 1_-z The provisions of Chapter 19.30. Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program. will apply ce Ili throughout all use districts in the City of Tukwila with the exception of the Manufacturing /Industrial 6 Center - Light (MIC /L) District and the Manufacturing /Industrial Center - Heavy (MIC /H) District (as 0 o they are established and identified under Title 18 of the Tukwila Municipal Code), ` (/) W_ H- 19.30.020 Removal - non - conforming off - premises signs. w o All non - conforming signs which are off - premises at the time of the adoption of the staged g compliance ordinance must be removed or brought into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards cn d within 18 months after the date of the adoption of the ordinance. This length of time, known as the i _ compliance period for non - conforming off - premises signs, expires on June 30, 2000. Any freestanding z E- sign that becomes non - conforming due to a change in ownership or management of a premises such that z o the sign no longer meets the definition of an on- premises sign (under TMC 19.08.140) must be removed 2 D within six months of such change in ownership or management. v ❑ o ff' ❑F- 19.30.030 Removal - non - conforming on- premises signs. = w O � A. All non - conforming signs which are on- premises at the time of the adoption of the staged z compliance ordinance must be removed or brought into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards 0 Lii cn within the three -year base amortization period. The base amortization period begins on January 1, 1999 0 I and expires on December 31, 2001. Businesses entering into a Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement z ( "VSR ") will be allowed additional time beyond the base amortization period. B. The VSR Agreement is an agreement between a land owner and the City of Tukwila regarding non - conforming on- premises signage. This agreement allows an extended time period of a specified length to either remove this signage or bring it into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards. 19.30.040 Voluntary sign reduction agreements. Any non - conforming on- premises sign covered by a VSR agreement will be allowed an extended compliance period beyond the three -year base amortization period. Applications are available from the Department of Community Development and will be processed free of charge. The application deadline will be established by staff. The approval and execution of all VSR's will occur no later than June 30, 2000. The implementation deadline for all approved and executed VSR's is December 31, 2001. 19.30.050 Extended compliance periods under Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement. The extended compliance period for non - conforming on- premises signs covered by a Voluntary Sign Reduction agreement is determined using the percent of reduction formula. This formula reflects the reduction in non- conforming signage on a premises (expressed as a percentage) as of December 31, 2001. It is used on a per premises basis to determine the extended compliance period for non - SIGNAMT4.DOC 11/18/1998 3 conforming on- premises signs. The reduction in the total square footage of all non - conforming signage to be reduced is divided by the total square footage of all non - conforming signage. A 15% bonus is added to the resulting percentage for each non - conforming freestanding sign (if any) which has been removed or brought into compliance. PERCENT OF REDUCTION EQUALS: Total non- conforming square footage reduced per the VSR Agreement, plus divided by the total non - conforming square footage before reduction A 15% bonus for each non- conforming freestanding sign removed or made conforming (if applicable) under the terms of the VSR The percent of reduction figure is then applied to a sliding scale, which establishes the duration of the extended compliance period, as follows. ESTABLISHING THE EXTENDED COMPLIANCE PERIOD PERCENT OF REDUCTION USING FORMULA DURATION OF EXTENDED COMPLIANCE PERIOD Less than 30% Not eligible for extended compliance period At least 30% but not more than 45% 4.5 years (base amortization + 1.5 years) At least 45% but not more than 60% 6 years (base amortization + 3 years) At least 60% and higher 7.5 years (base amortization + 4.5 years) 19.30.060 Substitution of signage under VSR agreements. Existing on- premises signage may be substituted with other new or existing signage, so long as the substitution is part of a total reduction in non - conforming signage on the premises. Such substitution must be under the terms and conditions of an approved VSR Agreement and will require a permit. Substitution permits will be issued by the Department of Community Development as a Type 2 Decision under TMC 18.104.OIOC. Substitution permits are subject to the compliance period stated in the applicable VSR Agreement. At the end of the compliance period, all signs on the premises must be in conformance with the Tukwila Sign Code. 19.30.070 Nuisance. All non - conforming and illegal signs must be brought into conformance within the applicable compliance period. Any sign which remains illegal or non- conforming beyond the expiration date of the applicable compliance period is hereby declared to be a nuisance and is subject to the terms, conditions and penalties of TMC Chapter 8.45, Enforcement. 19.30.080 Remedies - abatement. The remedies provided herein for failure to comply with the provisions of this chapter, whether civil or criminal, shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to any other remedies provided by law including legal or equitable relief to enjoin and /or abate a violation of this chapter. The costs incurred by the City in abating a violation of this chapter, including reasonable attorneys' fees, shall be borne by the party responsible for maintaining the violation. 19.30.090 Maintenance and repair. Nothing in this chapter shall relieve the owner or user of a non - conforming sign from the provisions of this code regarding safety, maintenance and repair of signage. 19.30.100 Reserved. Section 7. Ordinance 1768 as codified at TMC 18.104.010C is amended to add the review processes for VSR agreements, as follows: SIGNAMT4.DOC 11/18/1998 4 TMC 18.104.O10C Type 2 Decisions Type of Permit Initial Decision Maker Appeal Body (open record appeal) Substitution of Signage under VSR Agreements (TMC 19.30.060) Community Development Director Planning Commission Section 8. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause 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 9. Effective Date. This ordinance becomes effective on January 1. 1999e shall-be-publish - ... - ... ..- d-be in full force and PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a IRegular Meeting thereof this 23rd day of November, 1998. John W. Rants, Mayor ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: Jane E. Cantu, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By Office of the City Attorney FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO.: SIGNAMT4.DOC 11/18/1998 5 z z w 0 cow J i. CO u_ w0 u- a. cn zd 1W z. z 0 zr w U� wW u_ O LI. Z c. U= z City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director TO: Mayor Rants FROM: Steve Lancaste, L DATE: November 4, 1998 RE: Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Ordinance MEMO During the October 26th meeting of the Committee of the Whole, staff was requested to make changes to the draft Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Ordinance. Those changes are reflected in the revised draft Ordinance (attached) and are summarized as follows: Changes to Draft Ordinance 1. Revised definition for the word "Premises" (19 08 171). Although many developments in the City consist of several legal Tots under a common ownership, the visual impression created by these developments is that of one large lot or "premises ". The revised definition of the word "premises" would consider contiguous lots to be one premises if they share a common ownership. As a result, some signs that were previously considered to be "off - premises" could now be considered to be "on- premises ". z • w Jo U o Ill F— • u_ w o u. I Ci � w z= �-- o zi- w 0 o � o I-- w w. o ..z w 2. Deletion of the Landmark Sign Exemption Section (formerly listed as 19.30.100) U The Council has asked that this portion of the draft ordinance be deleted. In the interim, the p I Council has requested that a Task Force be created to provide them with recommendations z regarding signs of significance in the City (i.e., landmark, historic). These recommendations may include suggested criteria and type of application process needed to obtain landmark sign exemption. 3. Creation of New Exemption Section (19.30.100). The Council asked staff to provide language dealing with marginal non - conformance. The draft ordinance contains a provision allowing existing signs that exceed sign code standards by 15% or Tess to be considered conforming. 4. Corrections to Typographical Errors in Draft Ordinance Some typographical errors were pointed out by Council Member Pam Carter which have been corrected on the revised draft Ordinance (attached). Additionally, we have taken this opportunity to insert dates in the areas left blank on the Ordinance. These dates presume an adoption date of January 1, 1999. If these changes meet with Council approval, we will bring back a final draft of the ordinance for adoption at the next regular meeting. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Mayor Rants November 4, 1998 Page 2 Future Changes Under Consideration On October 26th, the Committee of the Whole asked staff to work on the following items: 1. Freeway Interchange Businesses Under the current sign code (TMC 19.32.180) business located within 1,000 feet of a freeway interchange are allowed to have up to a 25% increase in the allowed height and sign area. Based upon current code restrictions, such signs could never be taller than 44 feet nor could their sign area be larger than 125 s.f. per face foE a maximum total of 250 s.f. for all sign faces. The Council has indicated that it wishes to consider options ensuring that freeway interchange businesses maintain adequate sign visibility. Some options may include: a. Allow target businesses to have freestanding signs as tall as the underlying height limits in their zone. b. Establish a set height limit, based upon an assessment of existing signs that fall under the Freeway Interchange Business portion of the sign code. c. Apply no height limit. d. Increase the sign height and face allowance from 25% to 50 %. 2. Temporary Signage The Council has indicated that it wishes staff to develop language modifying the temporary sign provisions of the sign code. This would address those types of business which have unique temporary signage needs. These businesses may include grocery or drug stores, convenience stores or theaters. Staff will develop new code language to address the needs of these type of businesses. Some options may include: a. c. Allow some percentage of the wall of a business to be continuously used for temporary advertising of specials. Allow a maximum of 400 s.f. of temporary signage per business at any given time. Provide these types of businesses with an exemption from the current temporary sign code provisions. • We would be most interested to hear from the City Council as to their initial reaction to these options for Freeway Interchange Businesses and Temporary Signage. Summary The Committee of the Whole will be briefed on this information during their November 9th meeting. � AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING AND REPEALING PARTS OF ORDINANCE NO. 1274, AND AMENDING PARTS OF ORDINANCE NOS. 1768 AND 1792 AS CODIFIED AT TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 19, SIGN CODE; CREATING A STAGED COMPLIANCE SIGN AMORTIZATION PROGRAM; PROVIDING REMEDIES FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY; ► . _ . • I 1 1 • ►. - e PROCESS; AMENDING DECISION REVIEW PROCESSES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that Tukwila has many non - conforming, pre- existing signs which are located in areas annexed to the City over the past ten years; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to implement Comprehensive Plan policies 8.1.14 and 8.1.15, calling for an amortization plan and the preservation of signs that are "exceptional and significant "; and z ~ w 6U 0 U° J = H �w wo J w ?. WHEREAS, the City Council, through the adoption and implementation of the Pacific Highway w Revitalization Plan, seeks to adopt changes to the Sign Code to improve the visual quality of this z important part of Tukwila's business community; and z o LLI WHEREAS, during a number of public meetings over the past six months, property owners and n o businesses have expressed dissatisfaction with sections of the existing Tukwila Sign Code which pertain o to non - conforming signage; and ° F= ww 1- u' O wz U= 0 I— WHEREAS, the City Council wants to establish a firm date of six months following adoption of this ordinance to require all illegal signs to be removed; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to provide businesses and property owners with a process to amortize non - conforming signs that is equitable yet flexible by giving property owners up to 7 -1/2 years to bring non - conforming signs into compliance; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. A new section is added to TMC 19.08, Definitions, as follows: 19.08.171$ Premises. "Premises" means one or more contiguous lots of record (exclusive of any right -of -way), owned or managed by the same individual or entity a physically separate and distinct parcel of property, also 1 ._ .. Section 2. Ordinance 1274 as codified at TMC 19.08.130 is amended to read as follows: 19.08.130 Off - premises sign. "Off - premises sign" means any sign which is not on the same premises as the business with which it is identified, or which cannot be classified as an on- premises sign under TMC 19.08.140. SIGNAMT3.DOC 17/4/1993 -- ... z Section 3. Ordinance 1274 as codified at TMC 19.08.140 is amended to read as follows: 19.08.140 On- premises sign. "On premises sign" means a sign which displays advertising copy specifically related to athe primary use of the premises on which it is located, including signs or sign devices indicating the business transacted at, services rendered, goods sold or produced on the immediate premises, name of the business, person, firm or corporation occupying the premises, including signs with adjustable copy known as readerboards. Said sign must be on the same premises as the business with which it is identified. Section 4. Ordinance Nos. 1274 and 1792, as codified at TMC 19.12.050A.2. (Exceptions - Permits Not Required), are amended to read as follows: 2. Repainting or cleaning of an advertising structure shall not be considered an erection or alteration which requires a sign permit unless: a. a structural or electrical change is made; or b. the area or the shape of the sign is altered. Section 5. Ordinance 1274, as codified at TMC 19.28.030 and 19.28.040, is hereby repealed. Section 6. A new TMC Chapter 19.30, Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program, is hereby created to read as follows: 19.30.010 General. The Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program is a phased program designed to bring all signage in the City of Tukwila into conformance within a defined time period. The ordinance was adopted on January 1, 1999. All decisions regarding the Staged Sign Amortization Program are Type 2 decisions under TMC 18.104.O10C and may be appealed to the Planning Commission under TMC Chapter 18.116. For the purposes of Chapter 19,30, any legally erected wall sign that is existing_as of January 1, 1999 and which exceeds sign code standards as to sign area by 15% or less shall be deemed to be conforming, Any legally erected freestanding sign that is existing as of January 1. 1999 and which exceeds sign code Standards as to sign area, height and location by 15% or less shall be deemed to be conforming, 19.30.020 Removal - non - conforming off - premises signs. All non - conforming signs which are off - premises at the time of the adoption of the staged compliance ordinance must be removed or brought into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards within 18 months after the date of the adoption of the ordinance. This length of time, known as the compliance period for non - conforming off - premises signs, expires on June 30. 2000, Any freestanding Bign that becomes non - conforming due to a change in ownership or management of a premises such that the sign no longer meets the definition of an on- premises sign (under TMC 19.08.140) must be removed within six months of such change in ownership or management. 19.30.030 Removal - non - conforming on- premises signs. A. All non - conforming signs which are on- premises at the time of the adoption of the staged compliance ordinance must be removed or brought into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards within the three -year base amortization period. The base amortization period begins on January 1, 1999 and expires on December 31. 2001. Businesses entering into a Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement ( "VSR ") will be allowed additional time beyond the base amortization period. B. The VSR Agreement is an agreement between a land owner and the City of Tukwila regarding non - conforming on- premises signage. This agreement allows an extended time period of a specified length to either remove this signage or bring it into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards. 19.30.040 Voluntary sign reduction agreements. Any non - conforming on- premises sign covered by a VSR agreement will be allowed an extended compliance period beyond the three -year base amortization period. Applications are available from the SIGNAMT3.DOC 11/4/1998 2 Department of Community Development and will be processed free of charge. The application deadline will be established by staff. The approval and execution of all VSR's will occur no later than June 30, 2000. The implementation deadline for all approved and executed VSR's is December 31. 2001. 19.30.050 Extended compliance periods under Voluntary Sign Reduction agreement. The extended compliance period for non - conforming on- premises signs covered by a Voluntary Sign Reduction agreement is determined using the percent of reduction formula. This formula reflects the reduction in non - conforming signage on a premises (expressed as a percentage) as of December 31, 2001. It is used on a per premises basis to determine the extended compliance period for non- conforming on- premises signs. The reduction in the total square footage of all non - conforming signage to be reduced is divided by the total square footage of all non - conforming signage. A 15% bonus is added to the resulting percentage for each non - conforming freestanding sign (if any) which has been removed or brought into compliance. PERCENT OF REDUCTION EQUALS: Total non - conforming square footage reduced per the VSR Agreement, plus divided by the total non - conforming square footage before reduction A 15% bonus for each non- conforming freestanding sign removed or made conforming (if applicable) under the terms of the VSR The percent of reduction figure is then applied to a sliding scale, which establishes the duration of the extended compliance period, as follows. ESTABLISHING THE EXTENDED COMPLIANCE PERIOD PERCENT OF REDUCTION USING FORMULA DURATION OF EXTENDED COMPLIANCE PERIOD Less than 30% Not eligible for extended compliance period At least 30% but not more than 45% 4.5 years (base amortization + 1.5 years) At least 45% but not more than 60% 6 years (base amortization + 3 years) At least 60% and higher 7.5 years (base amortization + 4.5 years) 19.30.060 Substitution of signage under VSR agreements. Existing on- premises signage may be substituted with other new or existing signage, so long as the substitution is part of a total reduction in non - conforming signage on the premises. Such substitution must be under the terms and conditions of an approved VSR Agreement and will require a permit. Substitution permits will be issued by the Department of Community Development as a Type 2 Decision under TMC 18.104.O10C. Substitution permits are subject to the compliance period stated in the applicable VSR Agreement. At the end of the compliance period, all signs on the premises must be in conformance with the Tukwila Sign Code. 19.30.070 Nuisance. All non - conforming and illegal signs must be brought into conformance within the applicable compliance period. Any sign which remains illegal or non - conforming beyond the expiration date of the applicable compliance period is hereby declared to be a nuisance and is subject to the terms, conditions and penalties of TMC Chapter 8.45, Enforcement. 19.30.080 Remedies - abatement. The remedies provided herein for failure to comply with the provisions of this chapter, whether civil or criminal, shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to any other remedies provided by law including legal or equitable relief to enjoin and /or abate a violation of this chapter. The costs incurred by the City in abating a violation of this chapter, including reasonable attorneys' fees, shall be borne by the party responsible for maintaining the violation. 19.30.090 Maintenance and repair. Nothing in this chapter shall relieve the owner or user of a non - conforming sign from the provisions of this code regarding safety, maintenance and repair of signage. SICNAMT3.DOC 77/411998 3 19.30.100 Res erved.La-n . der TMC 18.144444-0E7 2 Lion Crit (1) It is at least 30 years old. (2) It has been unaltered or unchanged since its original installation. (3) It is rcpresenta repair of signage. • • (1) The Riverside Inn roof sign at 14060 Interurban Avenue (installed 1968) • • • 1 Procedure: All applications for landmar-lc sign exemptions must be submitted by June processed free of charge. 1. _. fellewing ,. ndit ono. Section 7. Ordinance 1768 as codified at TMC 18.104.010C is amended to add the review processes for _ - - VSR agreements, as follows: TMC 18.104.O10C Type 2 Decisions Type of Permit Initial Decision Maker Appeal Body (open record appeal) Substitution of Signage under VSR Agreements (TMC 19.1023.060) Community Development Director Planning Commission SIGNAMT3.DOC 11/4/1998 4 TMC 18.104.010E Type 4 Decisions Type of Permit Initial Decision Maker Appeal Body (closed record appeal) Landmark -Sign eemptier} (TMC 19. 9.100 Planning Gemmissien City Council Section 8. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause 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 9. 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 and effect five (5) days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 1998. John W. Rants, Mayor ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: Jane E. Cantu, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By Office of the City Attorney FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO.: SIGNAMT3.DOC 11/4/1998 ... - 5 z mow. J U, O 0 I CO CI J I--I w0 g• a z• a F- 1.1-1 Z= �- 0 Z I- LL) 2 Uin O I• -' Li Ili H 0 rz wz U= p. O I-. TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INTER - OFFICE MEMO z TO: Planning Commission Members z �(�, FROM: Steve Lancaster i' V J l/"v = J U 0 co o SUBJECT: Update on Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program w w - F.. w DATE: October 29, 1998 w o LQ =d F- w Z= I- I- O Z I- LL] U• � O ( 0H ww O ..z w 1. Variance or "allowance" options. The Council would like to look at options for providing 0 flexibility in cases where a sign may be only very slightly out of compliance. One possibility z might be a variance or "special exception" to be granted under hardship or other specific circumstances. Another option would be to consider signs that are only a small percentage too large, tall, etc., to be considered "conforming." (You may recall that the Commission discussed this, and came to the conclusion that no matter where the line is drawn, some signs will fall just outside of compliance. It will be interesting to see if the City Council comes to the same conclusion.) I thought you might appreciate an update on the City Council's consideration of your recommended Staged Compliance Sign AmortizationProgram. The City Council held their public hearing on the Planning Commission's recommended program on October 19, and then discussed and deliberated on the issue in detail on October 26. It appears that there is strong support for the basic program. The Council has asked staff to bring back some ideas and options on a few issues, which we intend to do on November 9.. Some of these issues probably need to be resolved before the Council acts on the proposed amortization ordinance. These are: 2. Landmark Sign Exemption: Some Council members have expressed reservations regarding the proposed Landmark Signs exemption. There appears to be support for leaving this out of the ordinance for now, and appointing a task force of citizens, business people and Planning Commission members to further review and develop the concept. 3. Off Premises Signs: There appears to be strong support for your recommendation to emphasize the early elimination of nonconforming off - premises signs. However, there is also some interest in revising the definition of "off- premises" to deal more appropriately with situations where several contiguous parcels are developed as a unit. As we have previously discussed, this is a troublesome aspect of our existing code. Perhaps we will find a good solution. PCSTATUS.DOC Some issues of interest to the Council probably need not be resolved before the Staged Compliance ordinance is adopted. These (along with the Landmark Sign issue) could be referred to the Planning Commission for your future review and recommendation. These include: z 1. Temporary Signs: Several Council members are concerned about the affect of our existing z temporary sign regulations on some types of businesses that have traditionally relied upon such signage to advertise daily or weekly specials and other promotions. While this probably does not need to be resolved before adoption of the amortization ordinance, it should be N o resolved soon. w = J � u_ 2. Freeway Interchange Signs: There is some concern that the existing provision for a 25% w o. height "bonus" for freestanding signs located near freeway interchanges, may not provide g enough height for these situations. a. a I'm sorry to be unable to attend your October 29 meeting to personally brief you on this. I'd be _ happy to learn of your thoughts on any of these matters, so that staff can provide the best Z possible advice to the City Council as they approach this important decision. I can be reached at z O (206) 431 -3670. U Finally, you should know that I've heard a number of compliments from Council members on the o level of thought, effort and creativity put into this proposal by the Planning Commission. It's = w, clear to me that they value your work very highly. F— u. O uiZ. U�. P. 0 z cc: Jack Pace, Deb Ritter, Michael Jenkins PCSTATUS.DOC OCT -29 -95 17:22 AIPPERSBACH ASSOC TEL:205 -524 -0337 P:01 MEMORANDUM To: Steve Lancaster, Director of Community Development City of Tukwila From: Michael Aippersbach Re: Lewis & Clark Site (15820 Pacific Highway South, Tukwila) Date: 10-29-9R/Thursday Via Fax: 431-3665 Re: Proposed Sign Code Amendments Steve, 1 met yesterday with Tom Ciut. Project Engineer for the City of Seatac's International Boulevard Improvements Program. Since their improvement program includes SRO's frontage along International Boulevard we were interested in their preliminary design concept. In considering the "uniqueness" of the Lewis and Clark site regarding possible changes to the current version of City's proposed amendments to the sign code, I wanted you, to be aware of the following. You may already be aware of this, but I wanted to make certain. Seatac's preliminary design concept shows a median strip along most of their portion of the improvement area. As proposed, it would eliminate any southbound, left hand turns into the Lewis and Clark theater and bowing alley from International Boulevard. Obviously, left hand turns don't occur as often during the evening commute, however, I have sat numerous times in my vehicle in the afternoons and evenings and watched theater (and bowling alley) patrons enter the site in that manner. My response to this median addition is that the current free - standing sign along S. 160th Street will take on even greater importance with this proposed median addition to International Boulevard. I have not taken an actual measurement, but I would estimate that the existing sign along S. 1 60th Street is approximately 600 -700 feet east of it's intersection with International Boulevard. Particularly in the evening, the freestanding sign's size and location are important features in safely directing patrons into the theater (and bowling alley) parking areas. cc. Rebecca Riesen, SRO c/ ro.defctukwme01.doc Michael Aippersbach & Associates PO Box 95429 - Seattle WA 98145 - (206) 523.3764/Fax: (206) 524-0339 SeaTac Prohibits off -site signs in the public right -of -way or on private property when they exceed the number of signs allowed in the zone. A site is defined as "one or more contiguous legal Tots used as the basis upon which the provisions or standards of the code are applied ". Bothell Bothell addresses commercial signage as being required to be on premises as "no commercial signs shall be located on any property other than the property upon which the advertised business is located" Auburn Defines on- premises, off - premises and premises, as follows: "On premises means a sign which carries advertisements incidental to a lawful use of the premises on which it is located, including signs indicating the business transacted at, services rendered, goods sold or produced on the premises, name of the person or corporation occupying the premises" "Off premises sign means any sign which advertises an establishment, merchandise, service, goods or entertainment which is sold, produced, manufactured or furnished at a place other than on the property on which said sign is located" "Premises means the real estate as a unit, which is involved by the sign or signs mentioned in the chapter" Lynnwood Defines premise as "The land occupied by, leased to, or otherwise controlled by a use, all the structures thereon, and all the space therein. Such space may include one or more building sites Kirkland Does not define premises, off premises in any context r • � Make It A BLOCKBUSTER Might" October 27, 1998 TRIENT PARTNERS City of Tukwila Panning Department City Council 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA. 98188 Re: Revision of Sign Code RECEIVED NOV 0 5 1998 CITY OF TUKWILA CITY CLERK Dear Mayor, Council Members and Planning Officials: I have been aware that the City of Tukwila is considering adopting a more restrictive Sign Code than is currently in place. As a retailer on the Highway 99 corridor, I am extremely concerned about the adverse effects of this proposed change on our ability to have a viable business in the City of Tukwila. We are currently operating at a level that we feel needs to be improved upon. I am currently in discussions with our sign manufacturer to investigate options available that more effectively communicate our presence to the citizens in the community. I have reviewed the possibility of installing a pole sign, which our present store does not have. I have been advised that we are allowed only two signs -- one on each side of the building. I believe a pole sign would have a significant impact on our visibility on Highway 99. However to have a pole sign we must sacrifice one of our existing signs. The current sign code effectively limits our ability to properly identify our location to the citizens of the community and to our customers. It is my understanding that the proposed Sign Code changes would be even more restrictive. These types of restrictions have a definite impact on the ability of retail businesses to operate and provide services to the community. This change should not be initiated without a full understanding of the negative impact that it creates. BLOCKBUSTER Video has not provided stores in locations where we are unable to properly sign our facilities. We know that our customers appreciate well -lit and well- signed storefronts and properties. Our stores are located in commercial areas that are intended to be zoned for retail businesses. We are opposed to any changes in the Sign Code that are more restrictive. We would encourage the City of Tukwila to take a more progressive approach to the Sign Code, which would allow for the development of new signage that is more creative. We are pleased to be a member of the Tukwila community. I am certain that after hearing our concerns you will be better able to address the issue of retail signs in our community. Sincerely, David Barber Director of Construction and Facilities 1011 S.W. Klickitat Way, Buildin C Suite 107 :LSSeattle, WA 98114 -1162 • (206) 748 -0800 Fax (206) 748 -0115 ,Dc L.. �:� 10/26/98 LION 14:57 FAX 425 455 8165 Page 2 October 26, 1998 STERLING REALTY ORG. Our request is simple. Delay action on the proposed amendments until such time as the City can determine the extent of impacts to businesses in the City as a whole and re- assess the proposcd amendments. It however, you desire to go forward with an amortization program, we respectfully would like the opportunity of having the City's Planning Commission re- examine a special category of signs for theaters (bowling alleys). We may not be able to have a representative available to attend your discussions regarding the proposed amendments to the Sign Code on Monday, October 26, 1998. Hopefully with delay in the vote to approve the proposed amendments, we may have time to work with the Staff and Planning Commission to address our Specific Concerns. Thank you again for your attention to our request. Sincerely, David S c oo I e r cc. Tukwila Letter to Cin•plex (dated August 27, 1998) 10 002 w 2 U O` CO co w w =: J w• O Q a. J- 1.— w r Z F- Z I- w n p. ON CI F- LU =V -▪ O ti.l Z 1 O Z • Ce City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 John W. Rants, Mayor TO: City Council FROM: Mayor Rants SUBJECT: Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Ordinance DATE: October 22, 1998 Dealing appropriately with nonconforming signs has been an important topic of discussion in our community for several years. Tukwila Tomorrow addressed the issue in its comprehensive planning recommendations, and the policy of amortizing nonconforming signs was carried through and ultimately adopted by the City Council in the 1995 Tukwila Comprehensive Plan. Since 1995, the Planning Commission and City Council have explored options for carrying out this policy direction. I believe the Staged Compliance Amortization program developed by the Planning Commission and DCD is a reasonable, fair and timely approach to achieving our objectives. The proposal has several advantages over other options that have been explored. • It addresses the worst problems first (illegal signs, followed by off - premises signs). • It provides incentives for early action on the part of business owners. • It will achieve meaningful results quickly, while allowing businesses to "spread out" their compliance efforts over time. • It provides considerable flexibility for business owners to develop a compliance strategy that best meets their needs. • It removes barriers to the re -use of existing signs during the amortization period. The City committed itself to cleaning up the sign situation when the 1995 Comprehensive Plan was adopted. There will never be a "painless" sign amortization program. However, I believe the Planning Commission's recommended program is a creative, fair and flexible approach, and I urge the City Council to adopt it. WR981022.DOC Phone: (206) 433 -1800 • Clty Hall Fax (206) 433 -1833 TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INTER - OFFICE MEMO TO: Mayor Rants z W FROM: Steve Lancaster 2 D i0 SUBJECT: Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Ordinance c.) 0 w--= DATE: October 22, 1998 1 S2w w0 2 During the City Council briefing at its October 12 meeting, several issues were raised by Council co T I- III ISSUE #1: Concerns were raised regarding the effect of the proposed amortization z ordinance on long - standing businesses that have traditionally relied upon continuously z o rotating temporary signs that advertise sale items or "specials" (e.g. grocery stores). w D0 Technically, the proposed ordinance would have no direct impact on the use of such temporary 0 signs. However, the Planning Commission has recommended that aggressive enforcement of the w w sign code accompany the adoption of a sign amortization program. Presumably, an aggressive t=- 0 members. enforcement program would address non - permitted temporary signs as well as illegal permanent LI-- O. signs. Such a program of aggressive enforcement would limit the ability of some businesses to v u) continuously advertise "specials." o I F Options. 1. Modify the "temporary signs" provisions of the Sign Code to allow some percentage of a businesses wall(s) to be continuously used for temporary advertising of "specials." Currently, the code limits such signage to no more than 25% of a businesses window surface (any individual sign can remain n place no longer than 30 days - see TMC 19.12.050(14)). 2. Adopt option 1, above, but limit it to specific types of businesses having a unique need for such signage. 3. Maintain the current regulations regarding temporary signs. Please note that this would not address any permanent sign nonconformance issues such businesses might have. These businesses would, however, have the ability to apply for Landmark Sign exempt status for individual permanent signs under proposed section 19.30.100. CC981021.DOC �' z ISSUE #2: Concern was raised that the proposed staged compliance program provides greater benefits (i.e. a greater ability to take advantage of the longer compliance periods) for businesses whose signage is farther from compliance with Tukwila's sign code. Extension of the compliance period is based upon the percentage of reduction in nonconformity that a business achieves in the first three years. This is true whether the business has one nonconforming sign or ten. While businesses having the biggest task ahead of them (greater nonconformity) may have more options for lengthening the compliance period, they will also have to remove or modify proportionately more nonconforming signage to reach the reduction percentages needed to obtain a time extension. Businesses with lower degrees of nonconformity may have fewer options for reaching a given percentage of reduction, but the amount of actual sign removal or modification they will have to do will be less. Options. Lengthened compliance periods based upon how far a business moves toward early compliance is a core concept of the proposed staged amortization program. If this concept is unacceptable, the entire proposal will need to be reworked. ISSUE #3: Concern was raised regarding the criteria for providing a Landmark Sign exemption, and with the specific signs identified as meeting these criteria. During the June Planning Commission work session on sign amortization, staff was asked to draft language for landmark sign exemptions. As part of our research we obtained a November 1988 Planning Advisory Service Memo from the American Planning Association (APA) entitled "Sign Controls for Historic Signs ". The criteria in the draft ordinance incorporates suggestions from APA and the Planning Commission as well as conversations with other jurisdictions and preservation groups. Two of the signs mentioned in the draft ordinance (Ben & Carol, Trudy's) appeared in the draft Pacific Hwy. Revitalization Plan as local landmarks. The third sign (Riverside Inn) was suggested by staff for consideration, since during earlier deliberations on sign amortization, the "landmark" nature of this sign was discussed. Options. 1. Remove the Landmark designation of specific signs from the proposed ordinance, thus requiring all potential Landmark Signs to make application and be individually reviewed according to the criteria in the proposed ordinance. 2. Set -aside the Landmark Signs section of the proposed ordinance for now. Appoint a task force to review the topic and prepare recommendations to the City Council. This task force should include representatives of the business community, Historical Society and Highway 99 Action Committee. 3. Remove the Landmark Sign provisions altogether. CC981021.DOC • 4. Adopt the Landmark Signs provisions as recommended by the Planning Commission. ISSUE #4: Concern was expressed about notification of prospective business or property purchasers. Options. Four options for attempting to inform prospective purchasers regarding the amortization program were described in the October 12 Council agenda. Pro's and con's were listed (see memo dated October 7, 1998). Staff recommended against any option that includes recording a notice to title, due to legal questions and the effect on property transactions. Staff supports publicity and notification programs through existing City communication channels (e.g. Hazelnut, business license process, etc.). Staff will be prepared to discuss these issues and others that may have been raised by the October 12 public hearing. CC981021.DOC z =- Z 6 U O' W. 0 = w gQ = a. I-w z= 1- 0 Z 1—: Lu moo. osz w uJ 1-• U 11 0 LL1 z C.) U) O z CE OF JQ. HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL WILL HOLD A PUBLIC • s �'t FIEARING ON MONDAY, OCTOBER 19, 1998, BEGINNING AT 7:00 PM IN THE COUNCIL CIIAMBERS .. AT .TUKWILA CITY HALL, 6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD., , TUKWILA, • i V, ASIIINGTONi�,TO CONSIDER THE .FOLLOWING: li; PROPOSED SIGN CODE AMENDMENTS PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT l't' OF 'A STAGED COMPLIANCE SIGN 'AMORTIZATION PROGRAM. ANY ANDI, ALL INTERESTED PERSONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT TO VOICE i`'E ' d�;J l APPROVAL,' DISAPPROVAL, OR OPINIONS ON THIS ISSUE. FOR THOSE UNABLE TO !'ATTEND,THE MEETING IN PERSON;;YOU MAY SUBMIT WRITTEN TESTIMONY TO TILE 7 ,, I CITY,CLERK'S OFFICE UNTIL5 PM ONMONDAY, OCTOBER 19, 1993. }vi 7 711 T,ii1j a +5 ' �1., 7t1 , • g I 1 n, ;tar ,� I ii �C^11IT '7�{,�Ojk�('`jTUKW7ILA STRIVES ,TO ACCOMMODATE PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES. : .�I'�te4G'tf� °il'1't•5" *,(� "��ii'i !71', j''„r, '7- ,��..�I,.,11 �t I7; {d •.�, ..r.1 ij '.4...� fir, ,} .'1., Ifs LEASE CONTACT, THE', CITY; CLERK'S OFFICE BY NOON ON TUESDAY; IF WE CAN BE OF ASSISTANCE (206-433-1800 OR TDD 1- 800 - 833 - 6388). 7+DA.\T� ED` •I :THIS� ��txC, 2 4,1 1 ;lot, 1� DAY 1 ITY OF, TUK ` WILA l ' t, .. , i r E. CANTU ''CITY CLERK DATE OF PUBLICATION: SEATTLE TIMES, FRIDAY, OCTOBER 9,1998 : � `�tg ATTAC�" `1ENT A AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TILE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING AND REPEALING PARTS OF ORDINANCE NO. 1274, AND AMENDING PARTS OF ORDINANCE NOS. 1768 AND 1792 AS CODIFIED AT TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 19, SIGN CODE; CREATING A • STAGED COMPLIANCE SIGN AMORTIZATION PROGRAM; PROVIDING REMEDIES FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY; PROVIDING FOR A LANDMARK .SIGN EXEMPTION PROCESS; AMENDING DECISION REVIEW PROCESSES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that Tukwila has many non - conforming, pre - existing signs which are located in areas annexed to the City over the past ten years; and WIIEREAS, the City Council wishes to implement Comprehensive Plan. policies 8.1.14 and 8.1.15, calling for an amortization, plan . and the preservation of signs that arc "exceptional and Significant"; and WHEREAS, the City Council, through the adoption and implementation of the Pacific Highway Revitalization Plan, seeks to adopt changes to the Sign Codc to improve the visual quality of this important part of Tukwila's business community; and WIIEREAS, during a number of public meetings over the past six months, property owners and businesses have expressed dissatisfaction with sections of the existing Tukwila Sign Codc which pertain to non- conforming signagc; and • WIIEREAS, the City Council wants to establish a firm date ()Isis months following adoption of this ordinance to require all illegal signs to be removed; and WIIEREAS, the City wishes to provide businesses and property owners with a process to amortize non- conforming signs that is equitable yet flexible by giving property owners up to 7 -1/2 years to bring . non- conforming signs into compliance; NOW, TI•IEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL • OF TI1E CI'TY OF TUKWILA, . WASIINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWSi Section 1. A new section is added to TMC 19.08, Definitions, as follows: 19.08.175 Premises. "!'remises" meats a physically separate and distinct parcel of property, also loiown as a "Lot" (as defined in TMC 1 8.06.500). Section 2. Ordinance 1274 as codified at TMC 19.08.130 is amended to read as follows: 19.08.130 Off - premises sign. "Off-Premises sign" means any sign which is not on the same premises as the business with which it is identified, or which cannot be classified as an on- premises sign under TMC 19.08.140. S1GNAA4127;DOC 10/7/1998 ••• • Section 3. Ordinance 1274 as codified at t'MC 19.08.140 is amended to read as follows: 19.08.140 On- premises sign. "On premises sign" means a sign which displays. advertising copy specifically related to the primary use of the premises on which it' is located, including signs or sign devices indicating the business transacted at, services rendered, goods sold or produced on the immediate premises, name of the business, person, firm or corporation occupying the premises, including signs with adjustable copy known as readcrboards. Said sign must be on the same premises as the business with •which it is identified. • Section 4. Ordinance Nos. 1274 and 1792, as codified at TMC 19.12.050A.2. (Exceptions - Permits Not Required), are amended to read as follows: 2. Repainting or cleaning of an advertising structure shall not be considered an erection or alteration which requires a sign permit unless: a. a structural or electrical change is made; or b, the area or the shape of the sign is altered. Section 5. Ordinance 1274, as codified at TMC 19.28.030 and 19.28.040, is hereby repealed. Section 6. A new TMC Chapter 19.30, Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program, is hereby created to read as follows: 19.30.010 General. The Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program is a phased program designed to bring all signage in the City of Tukwila into conformance within a defined time, period. The ordinance was adopted on . All decisions regarding the Staged Sign Amortization Program are Type 2 decisions under TMC 18.104.010C and may be appealed to the Planning Commission under TMC Chapter 18.116. 19.30.020 Removal:- non - conforming off - premises signs. All non - conforming, signs which. are off - premises at the time of the adoption of the staged compliance ordinance must be removed or brought into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards within 18 months' after the date of the adoption of the ordinance. This length of time, known as the compliance period for non- conforming off - premises signs, expires on 19.30.030 Removal - non - conforming on- premises signs. A. All non- conforming signs which are on- premises at the time of the adoption of the staged compliance ordinance must be removed or brought into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards within the three -year base amortization period. The base amortization period begins on and expires on Businesses entering into a Voluntary,Sign Reduction Agreement ( "VSR ") will be allowed additional time beyond the base amortization period. 13. The VSR Agreement is an agreement between a land owner and the City of Tukwila regarding non- conforming on- premises signagc. This agreement allows an extended time, period of a specified length to either remove this signage or bring it into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards. 19.30.040 Voluntary sign reduction agreements: Any non-conforming on-premises sign covered by a VSR agreement will be allowed an extended compliance period beyond the three-year base amortization period. Applications arc available from the Department of Community Development and will be processed free of charge. The application deadline will • be established: by staff The approval. and execution of all VSR's will occur no later than . The implementation :deadline for all approved and executed VSR's is {" /' • 19.30.050 Extended compliance periods under Voluntary Sign Reduction agreenc • • The extended compliance period for non- conforming on- premises signs covered by a Voluntary Sign Reduction agreement. is determined using the percent of reduction formula. This formula reflects the reduction in. non - conforming signagc on a premises (expressed as a percentage) as of . • It is used on a per premises basis to determine the extended compliance period for non- conforming on- premises signs. The reduction in the total square footage of all non- conforming signagc to • be reduced is divided by the total square footage of all non- conforming signage. A 15% bonus is added to the resulting percentage for each non- conforming freestanding sign (if any) which has been removed or brought into compliance. PERCENT OF REDUCTION EQUALS: Total non- conforming square footage reduced per the VSR Agreement, plus divided by the total non - conforming square footage before reduction A 15% bonus for each non- conforming freestanding sign removed or made conforming (if applicable) under the terms of the VSR The percent of reduction figure is then applied to a sliding scale, which establishes the duration of the extended compliance period, as follows. I STABLiSI•IING TI -1E EXTENDED COMPLIANCE PE PERCENT OF REDUCTION USING FORMULA DURATION OF EXTENDED . COMPLIANCE PERIOD Less than 30% Not eligible for extended compliance period At least 30% but not more than 45% 4.5 years (base amortization + 1.5 years) At least 45% but not more than 60% 6 years (base amortization + 3 years) At least 60% and higher 7.5 years (base amortization + 4.5 years) 19.30.060 Substitution of signagc under VSR agreements. Existing on- premises signage niay be substituted with other new or existing signage, so long as the substitution is part of a total reduction in non - conforming signagc on the premises. Such substitution Must be under the terms and conditions of an approved VSR Agreement and will require a permit. Substitution permits will be issued by the Department of Community Development as a Type 2 Decision under TMC 18.104.0100. Substitution permits arc subject to the compliance period slated in the applicable VSR Agreement. At the end of the compliance period, all signs on the premises must be in conformance with the Tukwila Sign Code. 19.30.070 Nuisance. All non - conforming and illegal signs trust be brought, into conformance within the applicable compliance period. Any sigo.which remains illegal or non - conforming beyond the expiration date of the applicable compliance period,is hereby declared to be a nuisance and is subject to the terms, conditions . and penalties of TMC Chapter 8.45, Enforcement. 19:30.080 Remedies - abatement. The remedies provided herein for failure to comply with the provisions of this chapter, whether civil or criminal, shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to any other remedies provided by law including legal or equitable relief to enjoin and /or abate a violation of this chapter. The costs incutTed by the City in abating a violation of this chapter, including reasonable attorneys' fees, shall be borne by the party responsible for maintaining the violation. 19.30.090 Maintenance and repair. Nothing in this chapter shall relieve the owner or user of a non - conforming sign from the provisions of this code regarding safety, maintenance and repair of signage. 19.30.100 Landmark sign exemption.. In an effort to retain signs that arc considered to be local landmarks in the City of Tukwila, certain non- conforming signage may be exempted from the requirements of the Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program. All decisions regarding landmark sign exemptions are Type 4 decisions made by the Planning Commission under TMC 18.104.010E. S1GNAAMR7:DOC 10/7/1998 3 Z 0 O O u) 0 fn W W Oi. 2 J LL-Q; w = W ~_ ZF- 1- 0` Z I—; • 0 0 • (� 0 W 2„ —O Z, CLI 0 • I- O Z. 1. Eligibility: An exemption from the Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program may be requested for any non- conforming sign so long as the sign meets all of the criteria for landmark signs as established by the City ofTukwila.• • 2. Exemption Criteria: a. To be designated a landmark sign, a sign must satisfy all of the following criteria: (1) It is at least 30 years old. (2) It has been unaltered or unchanged since its original installation. (3) It is representative of the prevailing signagc which existed at the time of its installation, containing elements that arc architecturally or visually significant such as lettering, logos or figures, stylized framing, color and /or neon. (4) It meets the provisions of TMC 19.12.110 regarding safety, maintenance and repair of signage. b. As of the effective date of this ordinance, the following signs have been granted a landmark sign exemption by the Tukwila Planning Commission: (1) The Riverside Inn roof sigii at 14060 Interurban Avenue (installed 1968) (2) Ben Carol Motel freestanding sign at 14110 Paciftc'I•Iwy. South (installed 1942) (3) Trudy's.Tavern freestanding sign at 15037 Pacific Iiwy. South (installed 1939) 3: Procedure All applications for landmark sign exemptions must be submitted by June 30, 1999. ` Applications are available from the Department of Comtnunity Development and will be processed free of charge. . 4. Loss of Exemption: A landmark sign will lose its exemption tinder either of the following conditions: a. The sign is altered or changed after issuance of its landmark sign exemption.. b. The sign no longer meets the provisions of TMC 19.12.110 regarding safety, maintenance and repair of signage. Section 7. Ordinance 1768 as codified at TMC 18.104.010C is amended to add the review processes for landmark sign exemption and VSR agreements, as follows: TMC 18.104.010C Type 2 Decisions Type of Permit Initial Decision Maker Appeal Body (open record appeal) Substitution of Signage under VSR- Agreements " (TMC 19.29.060) Community Development Director Planning Commission TMC 18.104.010E Type 4 Decisions Type of Permit Initial Decision Maker Appeal Body (closed record appeal) Landmark Sign Exemption (TMC 19.29.100) Planning Commission City Council SIGNAdMT DOC 10/7/1998 • I- re 2: 6 U O; CO W W =. J • LL 0 ga C 0 = W Z h- 0' Z U • Cl, CI h- Ww • U'. lit Z, O~ Section 8. Scverabilily. If any sectiL ,subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phi :�f this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court or 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 9. 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 and effect five (5) days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY TI-IE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of ,.1998. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Jane 13. Cantu, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By Office of the City Attorney John W. Rants, Mayor PILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO.: SfGNI AMRT DOC 10/7/1998 5 o,m Car 12A 1() -�� AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING AND REPEALING PARTS OF ORDINANCE NO. 1274, AND AMENDING PARTS OF ORDINANCE NOS. 1768 ANI) 1792 AS CODIFIED AT TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 19, SIGN CODE; CREATING A STAGED COMPLIANCE SIGN AMORTIZATION PROGRAM; PROVIDING REMEDIES FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY; PROVIDING FOR A LANDMARK SIGN EXEMPTION PROCESS; AMENDING DECISION REVIEW PROCESSES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that Tukwila has many non - conforming, pre- existing . signs which are located in areas annexed to the City over the past ten years; and • WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to implement Comprehensive Plan policies 8.1.14 and 8.1.15, calling for an amortization plan : and the preservation of signs that are "exceptional and significant "; and WFIEREAS, the City Council, through the adoption and implementation of the Pacific Highway Revitalization Plan, seeks to adopt changes to the Sign Code to improve the visual quality of this important part of Tukwila's business community; and WHEREAS, during a number of public meetings over the past six months, property owners and businesses have expressed dissatisfaction with sections of the existing Tukwila Sign Code which pertain to non - conforming signage; and • 'WHEREAS, the City Council wants to establish a firm date of six months following adoption of this ordinance to require all illegal signs to be removed; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to provide businesses and property owners with a process to amortize non - conforming signs that is equitable yet flexible by giving property owners up to 7 -1/2 years to bring non - conforming signs into compliance; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL 01? THE CITY 01? TUKWILA, WAShINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. A new section is added to TMC 19.08, Definitions, as follows: - 1- I 19.0 remises. "Premises" means a physically separate and distinct parcel of property, also known as a "Lot" (as defined in TMC 18.06.500). Section 2. Ordinance 1274 as codified at TMC 19.08.130 is amended to read as follows:. 19.08.130 Off - premises sign. "Off- premises sign" means any sign which is not on the same premises as the business with which it is identified, or which cannot be classified as an on- premises sign under TMC 19.08.140. SICNA AMT. DOC 10/7/1998 Section 3. Ordinance 1274 as codified at TMC 19.08.140 is amended to read as follows: 19.08.140 On- premises sign. "On premises sign" means a sign which displays advertising copy specifically related to the primary use of the premises on which it is located, including signs or sign devices indicating the business transacted at, services rendered, goods sold or produced on the immediate premises, name of the business, person, firm or corporation occupying the premises, including signs with adjustable copy known as 'readerboards. Said sign must be on the same premises as the business with which it is - identified. Section 4. Ordinance Nos. 1274 and 1792, as codified at TMC 19.12.050A.2. (Exceptions - Permits Not Required), are amended to read as follows: 2. Repainting or cleaning of an advertising structure shall not be considered an erection or alteration which requires a sign permit unless: a structural or electrical change is made; or a. the area or the shape of the sign is altered. Section 5. Ordinance 1274, as codified at TMC 19.28.030 and 19.28.040, is hereby repealed. Section 6. A new TMC Chapter 19.30, Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program, is hereby created to read as follows: 19.30.010 General. The Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program is a phased program designed to bring all signage in the City of Tukwila into conformance within a defined time period. The ordinance was adopted on . All decisions regarding the Staged Sign Amortization Program are Type 2 decisions under TMC 18:104.010C and may be appealed to the Planning Commission under TMC Chapter 18.116. 19.30.020 Removal non- conforming off - premises signs. All non- conforming signs which are off- premises at the time of the adoption of the staged compliance ordinance must be removed or brought into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards within 18 months after the date of the adoption of the ordinance. This length of time, known as the compliance period for non - conforming off-premises signs, expires on 19.30.030 Removal - non - conforming on-premises signs. A. All non - conforming signs which are on- premises at the time of the adoption of the staged compliance ordinance must be removed or brought into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards within the three -year base amortization period. The base amortization period begins on and expires on . Businesses entering into a Voluntary Sign Reduction 'Agreement ( "VSR ") will be allowed additional time beyond the base amortization period. B: The VSR Agreement is an agreement between a land owner and the City of Tukwila regarding non- conforming on- premises signage. This agreement allows an extended time period of a specified . length to either remove this signage or bring it into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards. 19.30.040 Voluntary sign reduction agreements. Any non - conforming on- premises sign covered by a VSR agreement will be allowed an extended compliance period beyond the three -year base amortization period. Applications are available from the Department of Community Development and will be processed free of charge. The application deadline will be established by staff The approval and execution of all VSR's will occur no later than The implementation deadline for all approved and executed VSR's is z rw` QQom: Wes; -j0 U 0 a CO 0 co w: w J I-. w 0i • Q S2 d' _: ZF., I- 0 Z F- LL! uj O 0 l0 -' O I- V w w. Z 0 i. O H z SIGNAAIRT. DOC 10/7/1998 2 19.30.050 Extended compliance periods under Voluntary Sign Reduction agreement. The extended compliance period for non - conforming on- premises signs covered by a Voluntary Sign Reduction agreement is determined using the percent of reduction formula. This formula reflects the reduction in non - conforming signage on a premises (expressed as a percentage) as of . It is used on a per premises basis to determine the extended compliance period for non - conforming on- premises signs. The reduction in the total square footage of all non - conforming signage to be reduced is divided by the • total square footage of all non- conforming signage. A 15% bonus is added to the resulting - percentage for each non- conforming freestanding sign (if any) which has been removed or brought into compliance. PERCENT OF REDUCTION EQUALS: Total non- conforming square footage reduced per the VSR Agreement, divided by the total non- conforming • square footage before reduction plus A 15% bonus for each non- conforming freestanding sign removed or made conforming (if applicable) under the terms of the VSR The percent of reduction figure is then applied to a sliding scale, which establishes the duration of the extended compliance period, as follows. ESTABLISI-IING TI -IE EXTENDED COMPLIANCE PERIOD PERCENT OF REDUCTION USING FORMULA DURATION OF EXTENDED COMPLIANCE PERIOD Less -than 30% Not eligible for extended compliance period At least 30% but not more than 45% 4.5 years (base amortization + 1.5 years) At least 45% but not more than 60% 6 years (base amortization + 3 years) At least 60% and higher 7.5 years (base amortization + =/.Spears) '19.30.060 Substitution of signage under VSR agreements. Existing on- premises signage may be substituted with other new or existing signage, so long as the substitution is part of a total reduction in non - conforming signage on the premises. Such substitution must be under the terms and conditions of an approved VSR Agreement and will require a permit. Substitution permits will be issued by the Department of Community Development as a Type 2 Decision under TMC 18.104.01OC. Substitution permits are subject to the compliance period stated in the applicable VSR Agreement. At the end of the compliance period, all signs on the premises must be in conformance with the Tukwila Sign Code. 19.30.070 Nuisance. All non- conforming and illegal signs must be brought into conformance within the applicable compliance period. Any sign which remains illegal or non - conforming beyond the expiration date of the applicable compliance period is hereby declared to be a nuisance and is subject to the terms, conditions and penalties of TMC Chapter 8.45, Enforcement. 19.30.080 Remedies - abatement. The remedies provided herein for failure to comply with the provisions of this chapter, whether civil or criminal, shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to any other remedies provided by law including legal or equitable relief to enjoin and /or abate a violation of this chapter.. The costs incurred by the City in abating a violation of this. chapter, including reasonable attorneys' fees, shall be borne by the party responsible for maintaining the violation. 19.30.090 Maintenance and repair. Nothing in this chapter shall relieve the owner or user of a non - conforming sign from the provisions of this code regarding safety, maintenance and repair of signage. 19.30.100 Landmark sign exemption. In an effort to retain signs that are considered to be local Landmarks in the City of' Tukwila, certain non- conforming signage may be exempted from the requirements of the Staged Compliance Sign AmOrtization Program: All decisions regarding landmark sign exemptions are Type 4 decisions made by the Planning Commission under TMC 18.104.010E. SIGNAA1R7:DOC 10/7/1998 e 1. Eligibility: An exemption from the Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program may be requested for any non - conforming sign so long as the sign meets all of the criteria for landmark signs as established by the City of Tukwila. 2. Exemption Criteria: a. To be designated a landmark sign, a sign must satisfy all of the following criteria: (1) It is at least 30 years -old. (2) It has been unaltered or unchanged since its original installation. (3) It is representative of the prevailing signage which existed at the time of its installation, containing elements that are architecturally or visually significant such as lettering, logos or figures, stylized framing, color and /or neon. (4) It meets the provisions of TMC 19.12.110 regarding 'safety, maintenance and repair of signage. b. As of the effective date of this ordinance, the following signs have been granted a landmark sign exemption by the Tukwila Planning Commission: z z� i..-z: (1) The Riverside Inn roof sign at 14060 Interurban Avenue (installed 1968) J U! U 0: W. w= LL uJ0. Q = a. �_ zF., Z 0 U� 0D-; OF w _ Z w 0 Z (2) Ben Carol Motel freestanding sign at 14110 Pacific Hwy. South (installed 1942) (3) Trudy's Tavern freestanding sign at 15037 Pacific Ilwy. South (installed .1939) 3. Procedure: All applications for landmark sign exemptions must be submitted by June 30, 1999. Applications are available from the Department of Community Development and will be processed free of charge. 4. Loss of Exemption: A landmark sign will lose its exemption under either of the following conditions: The sign is altered or changed after issuance of its landmark sign exemption. b. The sign no longer meets the provisions of TMC 19.12.110 regarding safety, . maintenance and repair of signage: a(\& \g;IO 4 •oIO E Section 7. Ordinance 1768 as codified at TMC 18.104.010C is amended to add the review processes for landmark sign exemption and VSR agreements, as follows: TMC 18.104.O1OC Type 2 Decisions Type of Permit Initial Decision Maker Appeal Body (open record appeal) Substitution of Signage under VSR Agreements (TMC 19.060) Community Development Director Planning Commission TMC 18.104.010E Type 4 Decisions Type of Permit Initial Decision Maker Appeal Body (closed record appeal) Landmark Sign Exemption (TMC 194.%;100) Planning Commission City Council S1GNAMRT DOC 10/7/1998 4 Section 8. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause 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 9. 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 and effect five (5) days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY TIIE CITY COUNCIL OF TIIE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 1998. John W. Rants, Mayor ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Jane E. Cantu, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By Office of the City Attorney FILED WITH TI -IE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY TIIE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISI-IED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO.: z mow` 0, U O. u) cn w N Hi wLL w 0: u_ a =• a I— w; 1. 1-0, Z F-, 0 S• i-) '0 F- W W' LL 1-, - 0: :Z` w 1= OF • 2 SIGNAMRT. DOC 10/7/1998. James H. Clark Gerald M. Hahn Thomas M. Hansen Robert C. Kelley Ralph Maimon OSLRAN, HAHN, VAN VALIN & WATTS, P.S. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 850 Skyline Tower 10900 N.E. Fourth Street Bellevue, Washington 98004 Telephone (425) 455 -3900 Facsimile (425) 455 -9201 E-mail: olwwlaweaol.com October 16, 1998 ATT: John W. Rants, Mayor City Council Members City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Ste. 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 M. Edward Spring Matthew B. Straight David M. Tall Victor Van Valin Charles E. Watts Of Counsel: Michel P. Stern Re: Council Meeting Monday, October 19, 1998 (Draft Ordinance Amending Tukwila Sign Ordinance - TMC 19 Dear Mayor and City Council of the City of Tukwila: I represent Sea -Tac Ford Truck Sales, Inc. located within the city limits of the City of Tukwila at 11000 Pacific Hwy. South. Sea -Tac Ford Truck Sales has a large pylon sign advertising its business location which was in place long before annexation of the property to the City of Tukwila. The sign has probably been in its present location and configuration for over 30 years. Estimated current replacement costs for the sign is in the neighborhood of $100,000. This sign may well qualify for the exemption criteria outlined in the draft ordinance with respect to "land -mark signs." On the other hand, the standard amortization provided for in the ordinance of 3 years, and the VSR additional amortization period are both constitutionally insufficient with respect to a sign of this value. To summarize the position of Sea -Tac Ford Truck Sales, Inc., it believes that the proposed draft ordinance dealing with non - conforming sign amortization does not create sufficient amortization periods to deal with the sign of the size and value of its principal sign, and also believes that it should be treated as an exempt land- mark sign in the same fashion that the Riverside Inn, the Ben Carol Motel, and Trudy's Tavern freestanding signs and roof signs are dealt with. My client will preserve and assert all its legal rights to the continued display of its principal sign located on its premises. We urge the City Council to reconsider the short amortization periods, and urge the City Council to include the Sea -Tac Ford Truck Sales' sign as an exempt land -mark sign in any amortization ordinance adopted by the City of Tukwila. . CIS �aN. HAHN, VAN AN INORTION ALINl& W47 7S, PS. z ~ w re 2 JU O 0 0 W = w W0 2 5 u. 1"a w = F- _ I— 0 zI- w • w U0 O =' O F—. WW I— • Z w O • F- z CITY OF TUKWILA October 16, 1998 Page 2 Thank you for your consideration of this letter. Yours very truly, OSERAN, HAHN, VAN VALIN & WATTS, P.S. Charles E. Watts CEW:smd cc: Michael Jenkins, Assistant Planner Department of Community Development Sea -Tac Ford Truck Sales, Inc. cor \cew \seatac.tuk 10/16/98 (smd) 91 -409 Wiz`. JU U O; 4 CO O W' W w O' g -J 1 _. z O z t- ;moo; o N` I— W 0. u- O iii Z o z. City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director TO: Mayor Rants FROM: Steve Lancaster DATE: October 14, 1998 RE: Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Ordinance MEMO A public hearing on the proposed Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Ordinance has been scheduled for the October 19th Council meeting. An Open House on the proposed amortization ordinance was held the evening of October 13th in Council Chambers. Five citizens attended. These citizens were concerned about how the proposal would impact their individual businesses. The attendees indicated that they may either attend the October 19th public hearing or send a letter to the City Council stating their views. z w 6 .J O oO, cow CD W WI W• o 2 �a =• a I- W zF-. 1- O zI W • p' U o - O 1- WW 1- Vi _Z At the conclusion of the public hearing on October 19th, the Council may wish to continue its o deliberations on the proposed ordinance, including the items raised in its October 12th work o session. In response to that session and at the Council's request, staff is in the process of gathering additional information for review and consideration. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 4313670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM TO: File FROM: Michael Jenkins DATE: October 12, 1998 RE: History of Formal Public Outreach for revisions to Sign Code for Sign Code Amortization ordinance The following list is a breakdown of the various meetings, mailings and publications that have initiated made by staff in support of the Sign Code Amortization Ordinance: 6/25: Briefing at EDAB monthly meeting 7/14: Briefing at Hwy. 99 action committee monthly meeting 7/23: PC directs staff to conduct public outreach for draft ordinance to people likely affected by ordinance. Staff mailed Notice of Open House and PC hearing to: • Businesses listed in inventory staff prepared to determine possible number of non - conforming signs • Land owners of businesses in inventory • All sign companies that obtained sign permits in Tukwila over last 2 years • People who participated in 1996 sign code revision process • Sent notice for publication to South County Journal, Highiine Times, Chamber of Commerce 8/4: SL briefed Chamber at luncheon concerning open houses and PC Hearing 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 4313670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 8/11 & 8/12: Open Houses 8/27: Public hearing before PC. Approved for City Council review. 9/98: Notice of proposed ordinance and brief description of program published in September Chamber Newsletter 9/1: Briefing at Chamber luncheon on process, including PC approval and proposed City Council calendar 9/29: Sent to mailing group outlined above, including parties of record through PC approval 10/6 Proposed ordinance on 10/12 COW agenda sent to regular mailing and fax list for City Council 10/6: Notice of Public Hearing sent by City Clerk's Office to regular mail - out / publication list ;; z. I• I- - w g O 0 co 0 W =. Jam.. cn u. w0 LQ =a 1-- _ z�. �- o. z F-- w uj 2 U o. 0 t- wuj H U'. 0 zi 0 Ni O z City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 October 12, 1998 Mr. William R. Kline 3220 N.E. 160th Lake Forest Park, WA 98155 John W Rants, Mayor Via facsimile transmission to 206 - 365 -9076 and by mail. Re: Request for Public Records date October 8, 1998 Dear Mr. Kline: This letter is sent in response to your request for records dated October 8, 1998. You requested "a list of businesses, by name and address, whose signs would probably be impacted by enactment of a proposed . ordinance regarding 'amortizing' nonconforming signs." The City does maintain records of those businesses and others that may be impacted and has provided that information to you pursuant to earlier requests for disclosure. The list that you now request only exists in the form of an intra - agency draft in which opinion is expressed. (It would be time consuming and costly for. the City to actually make determinations as to which businesses will be impacted by a City wide sign amortization ordinance, thus, only opinion is provided in the draft for the purpose of intra- agency use.) This intra- agency draft has not been relied upon or cited by the City in connection with any City action. Such a list is exempt from disclosure under RCW 42.17.310(1)(i). RCW 42.17.310(1)(i) provides: (1) The following are exempt from public inspection and copying: (i) Preliminary drafts, notes, recommendations, and intra - agency memorandums in which opinions are expressed or policies formulated or recommended except that a sPecific record shall not be exempt when publicly cited by an agency in connection with .'?: ,,_, Letter to Mr. Kline. re: PDA request Page 2 October 12, 1998 any agency action (Emphasis supplied). Thank you for you inquiry. Please direct concerns to my office by mail or by phone to 206- any questions or 433 -1872. Jane Can Deb! .=Ria;t,E ity,Clerk OFFICE OF.TIE CITY ober.t` F . Noe City Attorney 7 ATTORNEY z a. mow' u6= Jo UO CO, III =; u�LL, w0�.. u. Hzw Z F- 1- 0 Z 1- Lu Um. 0 —` 0 1--: WW U. 'LL O ~` z. ; 1 A F F I D A V I T O F D I S T R I B U T I O N We-(Jpi !1'C f 2-U (S l\) hereby declare that: ONotice of Public Hearing Notice of Public Meeting OBoard of Adjustment Agenda Packet O Board of Appeals Agenda Packet JJPlanning Commission Agenda Packet fJ Short Subdivision Agenda Packet O Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit jJShoreline Management Permit LJDetermination of Non - significance Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance fJ Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice LJ Notice of Action LI Official Notice Dither 0 Other was mailed to each of the following addresses on Name of Project File Number I RoposeD s 6(0 CODE AMLNDMt 'fS Signature Io/il9 R' City of Tukwila la John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMO TO: Mayor Rants FROM: Steve Lancaster DATE: October 7, 1998 RE: Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Ordinance In response to citizen requests to re- examine the amortization of non - conforming signage, the Planning Commission has developed a Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program. After receiving public input during two open houses and a public hearing, the Planning Commission recommended their proposal to the Community Affairs and Parks Committee. CAP has now forwarded this proposal to the Committee of the Whole for briefing purposes. An open house has been scheduled for October 13th and a public hearing has been scheduled for October 19th. Proposal The proposal is to amend the sign code through the adoption of a Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Ordinance. This ordinance will achieve amortization gradually, through incentives for early action en the part of business and property owners. The program's flexibility will allow for continued use and re -use of non - conforming signage during the amortization period. By the end of the amortization program (71/2 years after program adoption) all non - conforming signage in the City would be brought into conformance. The following is a brief overview of the major elements of the amortization program. All time periods commence at the adoption of the ordinance (a Sample Timeline is included in the attached Staff Report): • All illegal signs must be conforming within 6 months. • All non - conforming off - premises signs must be conforming within 18 months. Property owners with non - conforming signage may elect to execute a Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement ( "VSR "). The compliance period under a VSR varies from 41/2 to 7'/2 years in length. The length of the compliance period is based on a formula. This formula provides bonuses for the early removal of freestanding signs. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 ; Mayor Rants October 7, 1998 Page 2 • Property owners with non - conforming signage who do not enter into a VSR Agreement have three years to meet compliance. Additionally, revisions are proposed to the existing sign code, as follows: • Clarify the definitions of "off- premises" and "on- premises ". • Add a definition for "premises ". • Delete TMC 19.12.050(2)(c), TMC 19.28.030 and TMC 19.28.040. The amortization tools provided in these sections would no longer be needed if full compliance is achieved over time via the Staged Compliance Program. The following attachments are included in your packet: Attachment A Attachment B Attachment C Attachment D Attachment E Draft Ordinance Minutes of September 28, 1998 CAP meeting Public Comments during the August 27, 1998 Planning Commission Public Hearing (in draft Minutes) Legal Brief presented at August 27, 1998 Public Hearing by Washington Sign Council Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated August 20, 1998 On September 28th, the Community Affairs and Parks Committee reviewed the proposed Sign Amortization ordinance. At that time, Council Member Hernandez asked staff what mechanisms could be utilized to ensure that property owners (as well as potential buyers) are informed that they may have legally non - conforming signs. The following is a list of four options addressing this concern, with a brief analysis of each. Option 1: Recording a notice that would appear on title reports for all commercial properties Pros: • Quick result • Notice equally applied to all property in City Cons • May appear to be too intrusive • Recording notice on all commercial zoned properties (approx. 1,000) would cost approximately $8,000 to record a single page notice ($8.00 for first page) • May create a legal duty or liability by City • Would cloud title that may otherwise be free of encumbrances z CZ 2 z. 00 N o. J w w0 2 U.a =a I- In Z= zo W • w U0 o 2 O F- ww 1- F -L6 O Z. U= O 1-. z TIM js r Mayor Rants October 7, 1998 Page 3 Option 2: Record a notice that would appear on title reports for those properties identified in City database (developed for non - conforming freestanding sign inventory) Pros: • Uses existing data • Quick result co co 0 w =, F- U) w w0 g Q. 0 _02 0 zF- 1- o Option 3: Send out notices through yearly business license application w w Pros: U0 • Happens at an established point for businesses o i-- • Detailed information can be provided with application _ 0 �o1s: z • Requires additional staff time and financial resources from City Clerk's office cwi cn • Would cover pit business, not just affected businesses o jE • Would not provide notice to potential purchasers z Cons: • Data may be inaccurate • May appear to be too intrusive • Recording notice on all affected properties (approx. 500) would cost approximately $4,000 to record a single page notice ($8.00 for first page) • May create a legal duty or liability by City • Would cloud title that may otherwise be free of encumbrances Option 4: Regular mailout through city resources (Hazelnut, utility bills, etc.) Pros: • Can be done on a quarterly or other defined basis • Can be used to provide information about project status Cons: • Maybe too passive of approach • Does not cover properties in other sewer and /or water districts • To business community it may appear to be discretionary or informational, rather than a necessity Summary The Committee of the Whole will be briefed on the proposal during their October 12th meeting. This briefing will be prior to the October 13th open house and October 19th public hearing. . A F F I D A V I T , WENDY ��CQu�S'�nl Notice of Public Hearing O Notice of Public Meeting Li Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet LI Board of Appeals Agenda Packet fJ Planning Commission Agenda Packet 0 Short Subdivision Agenda Packet f Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit 0 Shoreline Management Permit O F D I S T R I B U T I O N hereby declare that: 0 Determination of Non - significance Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance LiDetermination of Significance and Scoping Notice fJ Notice of Action Official Notice , ❑ Other 0 Other was mailed to each of the following addresses on 0/77gL • pRoPOSAJ.. "5rA6a1) Name of Project 9‘,OPIPLAANW SIer� Signature . i%,e..*L -_ry1(e M O2. t r� zAn one p ci Grg4M G File Number City of Tukwila NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON MVIONDAY. OCTOBER 19. 1998. BEGINNING AT 7:00 PM IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT TUKWILA CITY HALL, 6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD., TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING: ANY PROPOSED SIGN CODE AMENDMENTS PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A STAGED COMPLIANCE SIGN AMORTIZATION PROGRAM AND ALL INTERESTED PERSONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT TO VOICE PROVAL, DISAPPROVAL, OR OPINIONS ON THIS ISSUE. FOR THOSE UNABLE TO ATTEND THE MEETING IN PERSON, YOU MAY SUBMIT WRITTEN TESTIMONY TO THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE UNTIL 5 PM ON MONDAY, OCTOBER 19, 1998. THE CITY OF _TUKWILA STRIVES TO ACCOMMODATE PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES. PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE BY NOON ON TUESDAY IF WE CAN, BE OF ASSISTANCE (206- 433 -1800 OR TDD 1-800-833-6388). DATED THIS DAY OF /i ,1998. CITY OF TUKWILA JANE E. CANTU ',CITY CLERK DATE OF PUBLICATION: SEATTLE TIMES, FRIDAY, OCTOBER 9,1998 ATTACHMENT A AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TIIE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING AND REPEALING PARTS OF ORDINANCE NO. 1274, AND AMENDING PARTS OF ORDINANCE NOS. 1768 AND 1792 AS CODIFIED AT TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 19, SIGN CODE; CREATING A STAGED COMPLIANCE SIGN AMORTIZATION PROGRAM; PROVIDING REMEDIES FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY; PROVIDING FOR A LANDMARK SIGN EXEMPTION PROCESS; AMENDING DECISION REVIEW PROCESSES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. z w. WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that Tukwila has many non - conforming, pre- existing 6 signs which are located in areas annexed to the City over the past ten years; and v p 0 • WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to implement Comprehensive • Plan policies 8.1.14 and w �' • 8.1.15, calling for an amortization plan and the preservation of signs that are "exceptional and o significant "; and 2 WHEREAS, the City Council, through the adoption and implementation of the Pacific Highway D. Revitalization Plan, seeks to adopt changes to the Sign Code to improve the visual quality of this W important part of Tukwila's business community; and z • I— 0 WHEREAS, during a number of public meetings over the past six months, property owners and w w businesses have expressed dissatisfaction with sections of the existing Tukwila Sign Code which pertain n o to non - conforming signage; and p �; � • Ili . WHEREAS, the City Council wants to establish a firm date of six months following adoption of v this ordinance to require all illegal signs to be removed; and v_ p in z • WHEREAS, the City wishes to provide businesses and property owners with a process to amortize U non - conforming signs that is equitable yet flexible by giving property owners up to 7 -1/2 years to bring' z ~ non - conforming signs into compliance; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. A new section is added to TMC 19.08, Definitions, as follows: 19.08.175 Premises. "Premises" means a physically separate and distinct parcel of property, also known as a "Lot" (as 'defined in TMC 18.06.500). Section 2. Ordinance 1274 as codified at TMC 19.08.130 is amended to read as follows: 19.08.130 Off - premises sign. "Off-premises .sign" means any sign which is not on the same premises as the business with which it is identified, or which cannot be classified as an on- premises sign under TMC 19.08.140. SICNAMR7:DOC 10/7/1998 1 Section 3. Ordinance 1274 as codified at TMC 19.08.140 is amended to read as follows: 19.08.140 On- premises sign. "On-premises sign" means a sign which displays advertising copy specifically related to the primary use of the premises on which it is located, including signs or sign devices indicating the business transacted at, services rendered, goods sold or produced on the immediate premises, name of the business, person, firm or corporation occupying the premises, including signs with adjustable copy known as readerboards. Said sign must be on the same premises as the business with which it is identified. Section 4. Ordinance Nos. 1274 and 1792, as codified at TMC 19.12.050A.2. (Exceptions - Permits Not Required), are amended to read as follows: 2. Repainting or cleaning of an advertising structure shall not be considered an erection or alteration which requires a sign permit unless: a. a structural or electrical change is made; or b. the area or the shape of the sign is altered. Section 5. Ordinance 1274, as codified at TMC 19.28.030 and 19.28.040, is hereby repealed. z Section 6. A new TMC Chapter 19.30, Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program, is hereby w created to read as follows: 2w 00 CO J = H LL` wo g w= w. F— 0. zm- w w Uo in w • w w z —I O F_ z 19.30.010 General. The Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program is a phased program designed. to bring all signage in the City of Tukwila into conformance within a defined time period. The ordinance was adopted on . All decisions regarding the Staged Sign Amortization Program are Type 2 decisions under TMC 18.104.010C and may be appealed to the Planning Commission under TMC Chapter 18.116. • 19.30.020 Removal - non - conforming off - premises signs. All non- conforming signs which are off - premises at the • time • of the adoption of the staged compliance ordinance must be removed or brought into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards within 18 months after the date of the adoption of the ordinance. This length of time, known as the compliance period for non- conforming off- premises signs, expires on 19.30.030 Removal - non - conforming on- premises signs. A. All non - conforming signs which are on- premises at the time of the adoption of the staged compliance ordinance must be removed or brought into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards within the three -year base amortization . period. The base amortization period begins on and expires on Businesses entering into a Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement ( "VSR ") will be allowed additional time beyond the base amortization period. B. The VSR Agreement is an agreement between a land owner and the City of Tukwila regarding non- conforming on- premises signage. This agreement allows an extended time period of a specified length to either remove this signage or bring it into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards. 19.30.040 Voluntary sign reduction agreements. Any non- conforming on- premises sign covered by a VSR 'agreement will be allowed an extended compliance period beyond the three-year base amortization period. Applications are available from the Department of Community Development and will be processed free of charge. The application deadline will be established by staff. The approval and execution of all VSR's will occur no later than . The implementation deadline for all approved and executed VSR's is SICNAMRT.DOC 10/7/1998 2 19.30.050 Extended compliance periods under Voluntary Sign Reduction agreement. The extended compliance period for non- conforming on- premises signs covered by a Voluntary Sign Reduction agreement is determined using the percent of reduction formula. This formula reflects the reduction in non- conforming signage on a premises (expressed as a percentage) as of . It is used on a per premises basis to determine the extended compliance period for non - conforming on- premises signs. The reduction in the total square footage of all non- conforming signage to be reduced is divided by the total square footage of all non- conforming signage. A 15% bonus is added to the resulting percentage for each non- conforming freestanding sign (if any) which has been removed or brought into compliance. PERCENT OF REDUCTION EQUALS: Total non- conforming square footage reduced per the VSR Agreement, divided by the total non - conforming square footage before reduction plus A 15% bonus for each non- conforming freestanding sign removed or made conforming (if applicable) under the terms of the VSR The percent of reduction figure is then applied to a sliding scale, which establishes the duration of the extended compliance period, as follows. ESTABLISIIING TIIE EXTENDED COMPLIANCE PERIOD PERCENT OF REDUCTION USING FORMULA DURATION OF EXTENDED COMPLIANCE PERIOD Less than 30% Not eligible for extended compliance period At least 30% but not more than 45% 4.5 years (base amortization + 1.5 years) At least 45% but not more than 60% 6 years (base amortization + 3 years) At least 60% and higher 7.5 years (base amortization + 4.5 years) 19.30.060 Substitution of signage under VSR agreements. Existing on- premises signage may be substituted with other new or existing signage, -so long as the substitution is part of a total reduction in non- conforming signage on the premises. Such substitution must be under the terms and conditions of an approved VSR Agreement and will require a permit. Substitution permits will be issued by the Department of Community Development as a Type 2 Decision under TMC 18.104.010C. Substitution permits are subject to the compliance period stated in the applicable VSR Agreement. At the end of the compliance period, all signs on the premises must be in conformance with the Tukwila Sign Code. 19.30.070 Nuisance. All non- conforming and illegal signs must be brought into conformance within the applicable compliance period. Any sign which remains illegal or non- conforming beyond the expiration date of the applicable compliance period is hereby declared to be a nuisance and is subject to the terms, conditions and penalties of TMC Chapter 8.45, Enforcement. 19.30.080 Remedies - abatement. The remedies provided herein for failure to comply with the provisions of this chapter, whether civil or criminal, shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to any other remedies provided by law including legal or equitable relief to enjoin and /or abate a violation of this chapter. The costs incurred by the City in abating a violation of this chapter, including reasonable attorneys' fees, shall be borne by the party responsible for maintaining the violation. 19.30.090 Maintenance and repair. Nothing in this chapter shall relieve the owner or user of a non- conforming sign from the provisions of this code regarding safety, maintenance and repair of signage. 19.30.100 Landmark sign exemption. • In an effort to retain signs that are considered to be local landmarks in the City of Tukwila, certain non- conforming signage may be exempted from the requirements of the Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program. All decisions regarding landmark sign exemptions are Type 4 decisions made by the Planning Commission under TMC 18.104.010E. SICNAAMRT. DOC 10/7/1998 1. Eligibility: An exemption from the Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program may be requested for any non- conforming sign so long as the sign meets all of the criteria for landmark signs as established by the City of Tukwila. 2. Exemption Criteria: a. To be designated a landmark sign, a sign must satisfy all of the following criteria: (1) It is at least 30 years old. (2) It has been unaltered or unchanged since its original installation. • (3) It is representative of the prevailing signage which existed at the time of its installation, containing elements that are architecturally or visually significant such as lettering, logos or figures, stylized framing, color and /or neon. (4) It meets the provisions of TMC 19.12.110 regarding safety, maintenance and repair of signage. b. As of the effective date of this ordinance, the following signs have been granted a landmark sign exemption by the Tukwila Planning Commission: (1) The Riverside Inn roof sign at 14060 Interurban Avenue (installed 1968) (2) Ben Carol Motel freestanding sign at 14110 Pacific Hwy. South (installed 1942) (3) Trudy's Tavern freestanding sign at 15037 Pacific Hwy. South (installed 1939) 3 Procedure: All applications for landmark sign exemptions must be submitted by June 30, 1999. Applications are available from the Department of Community Development and will be processed free of charge. • 4. Loss of Exemption: A landmark sign will lose its exemption under either of the following conditions: a. The sign is altered or changed after issuance of its landmark sign exemption. b. The sign no longer meets the provisions of TMC 19.12.110 regarding safety, maintenance and repair of signage. Section 7. Ordinance 1768 as codified at TMC 18.104.010C is amended to add the review processes for landmark sign exemption and VSR agreements, as follows: TMC 18.104.O10C Type 2 Decisions Type of Permit . Initial Decision Maker Appeal Body (open record appeal) Substitution of Signage under VSR Agreements (TMC 19.29.060) Community Development Director Planning Commission TMC 18.104.010E Type 4 Decisions Type of Permit Initial Decision Maker Appeal Body (closed record appeal) Landmark Sign Exemption (TMC 19.29.100) Planning Commission City Council SIGNAMRT.DOC 10/7/1998 4 cc wiz UO CO o. J 1- I-. • L.L. w O. g = a. t- _. z� I-0. zI- LL! 2o N. ID E-: ill 11.1 • O wz U W. 0 z Section 8. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause 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 9. 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 and effect five (5) clays after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 1998. ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: Jane E. Cantu, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By Office of the City Attorney FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO.: John W. Rants, Mayor zw: J U 00 ,.u)0. cn w. J w 0 ga =a w zx' o z �- Lij 0 -, H u na H V' w Z 0 Z SIGNtt MRT DOC 10/7/1998 A F F I D A V I T I, l J w.-Piv (41--z2.4-(2-itLY 0 Notice of Public Hearing Q Notice of Public Meeting OBoard of Adjustment Agenda Packet OBoard of Appeals Agenda Packet flPlanning Commission Agenda Packet 0 Short Subdivision Agenda Packet D Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit 0 Shoreline Management Permit O F D I S T R I B U T I O N hereby declare that: 0 Determination of Non - significance Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance LJDetermination of Significance and Scoping Notice Lj Notice of Action 0 Official Notice 0 Other (1 eGc hQ2z 22 /1,./X; ftrj c6ces24-- 0 Other was mailed to each of the following addresses on Name of Project File Number 9 - — z 1._ W 6 -I C.) 00 co 0, ILI_ CO u. w 0 cr)a w z� I-- F; LU ELI U O -. O I- wu, — 0 O; u. z' O ~: z City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director September 29, 1998 OPEN HOUSE AND PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SIGN CODE AMENDMENTS The Tukwila City Council is considering changes to the City's current sign regulations. If these changes are approved and adopted by the Council they will become part of the City's Municipal Code. Under the City's current ordinances, permanent signs that were legally erected but do not comply with current rules and regulations (concerning size, location, number per business, etc.) may remain in use indefinitely. Currently, such permanent signs enjoy "grandfathered" or "non- conforming use" rights until there is a substantial change in the use of the property, buildings or signs, a change in tenancy or the closure of a business. The most common example of "grandfathered" permanent signs are those built to King County standards in areas that were later annexed to Tukwila. The changes being considered would require the removal of these non - conforming permanent signs within a maximum of 71/2 years if the revisions are approved and adopted by the City Council. The proposal, called the Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program, would establish a graduated timetable for the removal of permanent signage which is non - conforming. This process is sometimes referred to as "amortization ". The program allows for the continued use and re -use of permanent non - conforming signage during the amortization period. The purpose of the program is to bring all permanent non - conforming signage in the City into compliance by the end of the amortization program (7% years after program adoption). Property owners with permanent signage that is non - conforming may elect to execute a Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement ( "VSR "). The compliance period under a "VSR" varies from 4% to 71/2 years in length. The length of the compliance period is based on a formula that provides bonuses for the early removal of non- conforming freestanding signs. Property owners with permanent non - conforming signage who do not enter into a "VSR" Agreement will have three years to meet compliance. Staff from the Tukwila Department of Community Development will conduct an Open House on October 13th in the City Council Chambers. This Open House will provide an opportunity to present the proposed changes and to answer your questions. The City Council has scheduled a public hearing on October 19 at 7 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. OPEN HOUSE October 13, 1998 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers Tukwila City Hall 6200 Southcenter Blvd. PUBLIC HEARING October 19, 1998 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers Tukwila City Hall 6200 Southcenter Blvd. For further information, please contact Deborah Ritter, Assistant Planner in the Tukwila Department of Community Development at 206 - 431 -3663. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE SIGN CODE BY CREATING A STAGED COMPLIANCE SIGN AMORTIZATION PROGRAM; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that Tukwila has many non - conforming, pre- existing signs which are located on areas annexed to the City over the past ten years, and z WHEREAS, removal or modification of these signs to meet Tukwila's regulations would further the intent of the sign code "that the streets of Tukwila may appear orderly z W and safety may be increased by minimizing clutter and distraction" and 6 M JU UO WHEREAS, during a number of public meetings over the past six months, u, „J property owners and businesses have expressed dissatisfaction with sections of the 1- existing Tukwila Sign Code which pertain to non - conforming signage and w0 2 WHEREAS, the City wishes to provide businesses and property owners with a D- u_ to amortize non - conforming signs that is equitable yet flexible, a w NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, z WASHINGTON HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: z o LLJ Section 1. A new section 19.08.171 is added to Ordinance 1274 Section 1 as o codified at TMC 19.08 as follows: o ww 19.08.171 Premises: A physically separate and distinct parcel of property, also known as a "Lot” (as it is defined in TMC 18.06.500). - z Section 2. Sections 19.08.130 and 19.08.140 of Ordinance 1274 Section o z 1(part) are amended to read as follows: 19.08.130 Off- Premises Sign: Any sign which is not on the same premises as the business with which it is identified or which cannot be classified as an on- premises sign under TMC 198.08.140. 19.08.140 On- Premises Sign: A sign which displays advertising copy specifically related to the primary use of the premises on which it is located, including signs or sign devices indicating the business transacted at, services rendered, goods sold or produced on the immediate premises, name of the business, person, firm or corporation occupying the premises, including signs with adjustable copy known as readerboards. Said sign must be on the same premises as the business with which it is identified. Section 3. TMC 19.12.050(2) of Ordinance 1792 Section 1 and Ordinance 1274 Section 1(part) is modified to read as follows: DRAFT 9/29/98 2nd version Page 1 19.12.050(2) Exceptions - Permits Not Required. 2. Repainting or cleaning of an advertising structure shall not be considered an erection or alteration which requires a sign permit unless: a. a structural or electrical change is made; or b. the area or the shape of the sign is altered. Section 4. TMC 19.28.030 and TMC 19.28.040 of Ordinance 1274 Section 1(part) are hereby repealed. Section 5. A new Chapter 19.29 is added to Ordinance as follows: Chapter 19.29 Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program 19.29.010 General The Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program is a phased program designed to bring all signage in the City of Tukwila into conformance within a defined time period. The ordinance was adopted on . All decisions regarding the Staged Sign Amortization Program are Type 2 decisions under TMC 18.104.010(C) and may be appealed to the Planning Commission under TMC Chapter 18.116. 19.29.020 Removal - Non - Conforming Off - Premises Signs All non - conforming signs which are off - premises at the time of the adoption of the Staged Compliance Ordinance must be removed or brought into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards within eighteen months after the date of the adoption of the ordinance. This length of time, known as the Compliance Period for Non - Conforming Off - Premises Signs expires on 19.29.030 Removal - Non - Conforming On- Premises Signs All non - conforming signs which are on- premises at the time of the adoption of the Staged Compliance Ordinance must be removed or brought into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards within the three year Base Amortization Period. The Base Amortization Period begins on and expires on . Businesses entering into a Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement ( "VSR ") will be allowed additional time beyond the Base Amortization Period. The VSR Agreement is an agreement between a land owner and the City of Tukwila regarding non - conforming on- premises signage. This agreement allows an extended time period of a specified length to either remove this signage or bring it into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards. 19.29.040 Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreements Any non - conforming on- premises sign covered by a VSR Agreement will be allowed an Extended Compliance Period beyond the three year Base Amortization Period. Applications are available from the Department of Community Development and will be processed free of charge. The application deadline will be established by staff. The approval and execution of all VSR's will occur no later than . The implementation deadline for all approved and executed VSR's is 19.29.050 Extended Compliance Periods Under Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement The extended Compliance Period for non - conforming on- premises signs covered by a Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement is determined using the Percent of DRAFT 9/29/98 2nd version Page 2 Reduction formula. This formula reflects the reduction in non - conforming signage on a premises (expressed as a percentage) as of . It is used on a per premises basis to determine the Extended Compliance Period for non - conforming on- premises signs. The reduction in the total square footage of all non - conforming signage to be reduced is divided by the total square footage of all non - conforming signage. A 15% bonus is added to the resulting percentage for each non - conforming freestanding sign (if any) which has been removed or brought into compliance. Percent of Reduction equals Total non - conforming square footage reduced per the VSR Agreement Total non - conforming square footage before reduction + A 15% bonus for each non- conforming freestanding sign removed or made conforming (if applicable) under the terms of the VSR The Percent of Reduction figure is then applied to a sliding scale, which establishes the duration of the extended Compliance Period, as follows. Establishing the Extended Compliance Period Percent of Reduction Using Formula Less than 30% at least 30% but not more than 45% at least 45% but not more than 60% at least 60% and higher Duration of Extended Compliance Period Not eligible for Extended Compliance Period 4.5 years (Base Amortization + 1.5 years) 6 years (Base Amortization + 3 years) 7.5 years (Base Amortization + 4.5 years) 19.29.060 Substitution of Signage under VSR Agreements Existing on- premises signage may be substituted with other new or existing signage so long as the substitution is part of a total reduction in non - conforming signage on the premises. Such substitution must be under the terms and conditions of an approved VSR Agreement and will require a permit. Substitution permits will be issued by the Department of Community Development as a Type 2 Decision under TMC 18.104.010(C). Substitution permits are subject to the Compliance Period stated in the applicable VSR Agreement. At the end of the Compliance Period, all signs on the premises must be in conformance with the Tukwila Sign Code. 19.29.070 Nuisance ' All non - conforming and illegal signs must be brought into conformance within the applicable Compliance Period. Any sign which remains illegal or non - conforming beyond the expiration date of the applicable Compliance Period will be subject to penalties under TMC 1.08.010 is hereby declared to be a nuisance and is subject to the terms, conditions and penalties of Tukwila Municipal Code 8.45. 19.29.080 Remedies - Abatement The remedies provided herein for failure to comply with the provisions of this Chapter. whether civil or criminal. shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to any other remedies provided by law including legal or equitable relief to enjoin and /or abate a violation of this Chapter. The costs incurred by the City in abating a violation of this Chapter. including reasonable attorneys' fees, shall be borne by the party responsible for maintaining the violation. DRAFT 9/29/98 2nd version Page 3 19.29.0890 Maintenance and Repair Nothing in this Chapter shall relieve the owner or user of a non - conforming sign from the provisions of this code regarding safety, maintenance and repair of signage. 19.29.090100 Landmark Sign Exemption In an effort to retain signs that are considered to be local landmarks in the City of Tukwila, certain non - conforming signage may be exempted from the requirements of the Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program. All decisions regarding Landmark Sign Exemptions are Type 4 decisions made by the Planning Commission under TMC 18.104.010(E). A. Eligibility An exemption from the Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program may be requested for any non - conforming sign so long as the sign meets all of the criteria for Landmark Signs as established by the City of Tukwila. B. Exemption Criteria To be designated a Landmark Sign, a sign must satisfy all of the following criteria: 1. It is at least 30 years old. 2. It has been unaltered or unchanged since its original installation. 3. It is representative of the prevailing signage which existed at the time of its installation, containing elements that are architecturally or visually significant such as lettering, logos or figures, stylized framing, color and /or neon. 4. It meets the provisions of TMC 19.12.110 regarding safety, maintenance and repair of signage. As of the date of this ordinance, the following signs have been granted a Landmark Sign Exemption by the Tukwila Planning Commission: 1. The Riverside Inn roof sign at 14060 Interurban Avenue (installed 1968) 2. Ben Carol Motel freestanding sign at 14110 Pacific Highway South (installed 1942) 3. Trudy's Tavern freestanding sign at 15037 Pacific Highway South (installed (1939) C. Procedure All applications for Landmark Sign Exemptions must be submitted by June 30, 1999. Applications are available from the Department of Community Development and will be processed free of charge. D. Loss of Exemption A Landmark Sign will lose its exemption under either of the following conditions: 1 The sign is altered or changed after issuance of its Landmark Sign Exemption. 2. The sign no longer meets the provisions of TMC 19.12.110 regarding safety, maintenance and repair of signage. Section 6. TMC 18.104.010(C) of Ordinance 1796 Section 3(part) and Ordinance 1768 Section 2(part) are amended to read as follows: DRAFT 9/29/98 2nd version Page 4 TMC 18.104.010(C) Type 2 Decisions Type of Permit Initial Decision Maker Appeal Body (open record appeal) Substitution of Signage under VSR Agreements (TMC 19.29.060) Community Development Director Planning Commission TMC 18.104.010(E) Type 4 Decisions Type of Permit Initial Decision Maker Appeal Body (closed record appeal) Landmark Sign Exemption (TMC 19.29.090100) Planning Commission City Council Section 7. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence or phrase of this ordinance. Section 8. 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 (5) days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of 1998. ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: Jane E. Cantu, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: BY: Office of the City Attorney FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO.: DRAFT 9/29/98 2nd version Page 5 John W. Rants, Mayor . The City of Tukwila Department of Community Development has scheduled an Open House to present proposed changes to the City's sign regulations. The Open House will be held in City Council Chambers on October 13th from 5 to 7 p.m. The Tukwila City Council has scheduled a public hearing regarding the proposed changes on October 19th at 7 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. If you have any questions, please contact Deborah Ritter, Assistant Planner at 206 - 431 -3663. �• Z ry 6 U0 • w w J w • 0 gQ =• a w Z f- 0 Z I- w 2 U 0 0 1-, uJ w 1- - ll. O LLIZ, O~ z City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMO TO: Community Affairs and Parks Committee of the Tukwila City Council FROM: Jack Pace, Acting DCD Direct DATE: September 23, 1998 RE: Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Ordinance Since the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, there has been considerable discussion about sign amortization. In 1996, the Planning Commission proposed an amortization program which was recommended to the City Council but never adopted. The City Council did, however, slightly modify how non - conforming signs are treated by prohibiting the refacing of non- conforming signs (Ordinance 1792). Over the past six months, some property owners and new businesses have expressed dissatisfaction with sections of the sign code that pertain to non - conforming signage. They have urged the Planning Commission to modify portions of the sign code and to re- examine the amortization of non - conforming signage in a manner that is equitable yet flexible. In response to these requests and as part of the Commission's review of several sign - related matters, a different type of sign amortization program will be presented for consideration by the City Council in October. Proposal The Planning Commission's proposal is to amend the sign code through the adoption of a Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Ordinance. This ordinance will achieve amortization gradually, through incentives for early action on the part of business and property owners. The program's flexibility will allow for continued use and re -use of non - conforming signage during the amortization period. By the end of the amortization program (7% years after program adoption) all non - conforming signage in the City would be brought into conformance. The following is a brief overview of the major elements of the amortization program. All time periods commence at the adoption of the ordinance (a Sample Timeline is included in the attached Staff Report): • All illegal signs must be conforming within 6 months. • All non - conforming off - premises signs must be conforming within 18 months. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Community Affairs and Parks Committee September 23, 1998 Page 2 • Property owners with non - conforming signage may elect to execute a Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement ( "VSR "). The compliance period under a VSR varies from 41/2 to z 7'/Z years in length. The length of the compliance period is based on a formula. This i formula provides bonuses for the early removal of freestanding signs. w • Property owners with non - conforming signage who do not enter into a VSR Agreement -J o have three years to meet compliance. , to 0 lll J F- = Additionally, the Planning Commission proposes revisions to the existing sign code, as follows: N w w0 • Clarify the definitions of "off-premises" and "on- premises ". 2 J • Add a definition for "premises ". LL. D =w • Delete TMC 19.12.050(2)(c), TMC 19.28.030 and TMC 19.28.040. The amortization z 1 tools provided in these sections would no longer be needed if full compliance is z o achieved over time via the Staged Compliance Program. D • o The following attachments are included in your packet: o co cal— Attachment A Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated August 20, 1998. _ tu ui Attachment B Public comments during the August 27, 1998 I- I Planning Commission Public Hearing (excerpts from Hearing V--- z Minutes). tii u) Attachment C Legal Brief presented at August 27, 1998 Public Hearing o by Washington Sign Council. z Planning Commission Recommendation DCD Staff held Open Houses on August 11th and 12th and the Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 27th. Several members of the business community made favorable comments about the proposal. Excerpts of their comments are provided in the attached August 27th Hearing Minutes. The Washington Sign Council, represented by attorney Susan Rae Sampson, presented a Brief at the hearing which was read into the minutes (attached). At the conclusion of the hearing, the Commission voted unanimously to recommend the Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program to the City Council. Council Action Staff recommends that CAP forward the proposal to the Committee of the Whole for further review and discussion. This proposal has been tentatively scheduled to appear on the COW agenda for October 12th and an Open House is tentatively scheduled for October 13th (5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers). The City Council Public Hearing has been tentatively scheduled for October 19th. 'mit aft 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2.1 22 23 24 25 2 7 locc: ■—•/". : . — : • • •—• ; • -- , ,.-.• • — . BEFORE THE CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION RE: SIGN CODE AMENDMENTS BRIEF OF WASHINGTON SIGN COUNCIL I. COMMENTING PARTY This comment is provided by the Washington Sign Council, a trade association for businesses that design, manufacture, lease, sell, install, and maintain on premise signs, especially outdoor electrical advertising signs.. The Washington Sign Association is affiliated with the International Sign Association. The Council also represents the interests of its customers and sign owners, who tend to be unaware of proposed changes to sign codes. II. RESPONSE REQUESTED The Washington Sign Council recommends that the Planning Commission's proposed "amortization" plan not be implemented because it is unnecessarily disruptive and costly. The problem it addresses can be treated naturally by market forces. Alternatively, if the Commission is unwilling to withdraw the plan, then the plan should be modified to (a) provide reasonable compensation to sign owners whose signs are abated; or (b) extend the "amortization" period to a commercially reasonable period, which may va.ry upon a sign-to-sign basis. SAMPSON & WILSON, INC, P.S. 1400 Talbot Road S. 0 Ste. 400 RentOn, Washington 98055-42S2 Pierce County Kng County F3CSiTtie 1=3) 662-4363 =-460:1 (4=1 ..4/334 . ,' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1�5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 III. FACTUAL BACKGROUND OF RECOMMENDATIONS By annexing portions of unincorporated King County, the City has encompassed signs that were lawful under County codes when erected, but which do not conform to the City's existing code. Thus, they are deemed to be lawful nonconforming signs. Under the present code, nonconforming signs may remain in place and may be maintained. However, when they are abandoned or significantly modified, they must be removed or brought into exact compliance with existing code. Thus, nonconforming signs eventually disappear from the cityscape as businesses cease operations or change names and owners, as signs become obsolete due to changes of style and technology, as market conditions and consumer preferences change, as signs wear out and are replaced by newer, more efficient models, or as damage occurs to signs. Such removal by attrition presents no cost to the City, no disruption to the business community, and incidently generates very little business for the sign industry. By contrast, a program to remove legal nonconforming signs on an accelerated schedule has social, financial, and legal downsides. Socially, knowing that a sign must come down soon, an owner has no incentive to maintain his sign in an attractive condition. Given that his sign is removed, an owner becomes concerned that sign code might change again, and his sign might be removable again. An owner has little incentive to order and maintain a well designed attractive sign that constitutes a significant investment. The effectiveness of the sign is influenced by a multitude of factors, but a few of the following are key: 1. The nature of the business advertised. Some businesses, including such major motel chains as Motel 6, rely upon drop -in business, not reservations, for their success, so that clearly visible signs are necessary. -2- '* 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 4,. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2. Access to the site once the sign becomes visible. A motorist needs to see a sign in time to change lanes and find the driveway before turning. For illustrations, see "Sign Regulation and the Mechanics of Visual Communication," by David Jones, copyright 1996 International Sign Association, Alexandria Virginia. 3. Visibility of a sign is affected by the legal speed on adjacent streets. The faster traffic moves, the narrower the visual field becomes for passing motorists. Signs that are set back too far from the roadway, and many wall signs, are no longer visible or useful. 4. Visibility is effected by letter size, with a rough rule of thumb being that one - inch letters are visible from about 40 feet. The faster traffic moves, the larger a sign must be to be seen and the closer to the roadway it needs to be. Financially impacted by the loss of a sign, a business owner may be unable to afford a nice replacement. IV. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS Property Rights v. Amortization. Legally, the requirement that a sign be removed has clear consequences. A sign is "property." The government cannot deprive an owner of his property without paying him just compensation, according to the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution, a requirement that is applied to state and local governments by enactment of the Fourteenth Amendment. "Just compensation" is the value of a sign, and the value of a sign is far more then the cost to manufacture and erect a sign. Rather, the value of a sign is reflected in the business its draws. See, for example, The Economic Value of On- Premise Signage," copyright 1997 the International Sign Association and the California Electrical Sign Association. This study was carried out by the University of San Diego School of : SAMPSON & WILSON, INC., PS. 1400 Talbot Road So. 0 Ste. 400 Renton, Washington 9805S -4282 Pierce County King County Facsimile rmsi ass-c.o. (4=1 +eoo (mil die 1 Business Administration and cites other related studies such as " The Economic Value of 2 on Premises Signs," by Raymond T. Anderson, 1983. 3 A sign code that requires a sign to be removed before the end of its useful life or 4 a sign code that is so restrictive that effective signage becomes impossible denies a sign 5 owner his property rights and is subject to the just compensation requirements for legal 6 deprivation of property. See, Agins v. City of Tiburon, 447 U.S. 255 (1980) regarding 7 regulatory taking; and Connoly v. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 475 U.S. 211 8 (1986) regarding factors determining whether there is a regulatory taking. If a major 9 portion of the property's value is lost, there is a regulatory taking. Moore v. City of Costa 10 Meca, 886 F.2d 260 (9th Cir. 1989). 11 The proposed changes to the Tukwila Code include 3 years for a sign to be 12 brought into conformance with the. existing Code. Up to 7 1/2 years is allowed for 13 graduated compliance, but graduated compliance is only useful or practical for such a 14 nonconformity as an excessive number of wall signs. It is not feasible for free standing 15 pole signs to be reduced in height and set back further from the roadway on an 16 incremental basis requiring changes to the structure and its footings. 17 To allow a sign owner to keep his lawful. nonconforming sign for only three years 18 and to call it "amortization" is not legally sufficient. To declare today that the sign must 19 come down in 3 years is not amortization at all; it is merely a delayed taking. Three years 20 is not enough to allow a sign owner to enjoy his investment -based expectations; rather, 21 it is a taking. Short blanket amortization periods have been held unreasonable in such 22 cases as National Advertising Company v. County of Monteray, 464 P.2d 33 (Cal. 1970). 23 Although amortization periods have been sustained in cases in other jurisdictions or 24 blanket time periods may be unreasonable when applied to individual signs. It may be 25 instructive to observe that under the Federal Income Tax Codes, an amortization period SAMPSON & WILSON, INC., P.S. 1400 Talbot Road So. 0 Ste. 400 Renton, Washington 98055 -428Z Pierce County King County Facsimile fM.1) a-ass. (4231 233-4e03 (mil -4- 1 for a metal and masonry free - standing sign that is an improvement to real property could 2 extend to 19 years, far more then the 3 years proposed by the City of Tukwila. IRC § 3 168 (b) (2) (A) (i) 4 Frankly, most of the signs of interest to the Washington Sign Council are those 5 contained in commercial areas. Under the Tukwila City Code, in commercial zones where 6 signs will face other commercial or industrial zones, generally one free standing sign is 7 permitted for each site, with additional free - standing signs permitted for each 400 linear 8 feet of frontage on a public street if the site contains two or more detached buildings 9 occupied by at least two different tenants. Sign area is limited to 100 square feet with a 10 total 200 square feet for all sides (two sided signs only); and no one side may contain 11 more than 50% of the allowable sign area without further permitting decisions. Every free - 12 standing sign is limited to 35' in height (approximately two stories) but may not exceed 13 the height of the building it serves. Imposing these limitations could impose a substantial 14 changes on the existing major free - standing signs in annexed areas such as Pacific 15 Highway South. The new sign restrictions (Tukwila Municipal Code 19.32.140) would 16 result in costly losses for business owners and ineffective signage on premises. 17 Regulation of Sign Conent. Another feature of the Tukwila Code that would be 18 applied to commercial signs is a provision that patently limits the content of the sign, in 19 violation of the sign owner's rights. Tukwila Municipal Code 19.32.140 E provides that "the 20 free standing sign shall contain no promotional copy but shall be limited to the name of 21 the company or the activity being identified and trademark or logo, except where an 22 approved readerboard is used." However, strong legal constraints apply to the 23 government's limitation on the content of signs. Although a government may limit the 24 number of signs that the owner of the premises may expose, may regulate the structure 25 of the sign including its height, and may regulate its placement on site, regulating the .5- SAMPSON & WILSON, INC, P.S. 1400 Talbot Road So. 0 Ste. 400 Renton, Washington 98055.4282 Pierce County King County Facsimile (25316ta43 (4271225+603 (422133.+522 1 content of sign is subject to the First Amendment Free Speech Protection of the United 2 State Constitution. Free speech, including commercial speech, may be regulated by the 3 government only with as minimal time place and manner regulations as are necessary to 4 protect a compelling governmental interest. See, for example, S.O.C. Inc. v. County of 5 Clark, 97 -15912 (9th Cir., August 14, 1998) The City of Tukwila should not expose sign 6 owners to regulation of sign content. 7 Registered Trademarks. Finally, the City should be aware that it is lawfully 8 prohibited from requiring a sign owner to modify the content of his sign if content 9 happens to be a federally registered trademark. Blockbuster v. The City of Tempe, 97- 10 15535 (9th Cir. 1997) . 11 V. CONCLUSION 12 In conclusion, it is the advice of the Washington Sign Council to the Planning 13 Commission that the proposed changes to the Tukwila Sign Code are legally insufficient 14 in the amortization prohibitions. Fairness to sign owners and reasonable compensation 15 is due. Moreover, the proposed sign restrictions are too limited for significant commercial 16 corridors such as Pacific Highway South. The Commission should avail itself of studies 17 regarding the valuation of on- premise signs and the ergonomic factors that make signage 18 efficient, and should assure that any restrictions on signage it imposes still allows signage 19 that is effective considering the speed of passing traffic. 20 The Washington Sign Council is willing to assist the Planning Commission in 21 procuring copies of valid studies regarding sign design that will enable the planning 22 Commission to enact a useful and lawful sign code that is not intrusive on the rights of 23 sign owners. 24 25 • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15. 16 17 18 19 20 21. 22 23 24 25 Respectfully submitted this 27th day of August, 1998. -7- OCeli G2-12_ — V D Susan Rae Sampson, WSBA #5732 Attorney for the Washington Sign Council :re III': u � 2 J U;. 0o u) wI, cn tL! • ;w0 LQ to a .1- w �-0 z�- ILI ay • 0 0'. -I • 0 I- �ww; z,. U 10/26/98 MON 14:57 FAX 425 455 8165 STERLING REALTY ORG. 10003 City of Tukwila John W Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director August 27, 1998 Jim Henry Lowe Cineplex 18421 Alderwood Mall Parkway Lynnwood, WA 98037 Re: Sign Amortization program Dear Mr. Henry: Thank you for your phone call following your questions at the August 11, 1998 Open House attended by you and Mr. Van Der Bend. On review of your freestanding signage at both at Southcenter Cinema and Lewis and Clark Cinemas it would appear that you are allowed one unique sign per site, as defined under Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) 19.08.260. As unique signs, they are exempt from the general height, setback and area requirements that pertain to other signs due to the nature of your business activities. A readerboard in conjunction with the signage is also permitted due to the need to have changing text that advertises movies. Although one such freestanding sign is present at Southcenter Cinema, there are three present at Lewis and Clark Cinemas. While the Unique Sign designation allows the dimensions of the freestanding or wall sign to be exempt, it does not exempt you from the allowed number for a business. Businesses in the City of Tukwila are primarily allowed either one wall sign and one freestanding sign or two wall signs and no freestanding signs. Only Hotels, Planned Shopping Center Malts and Gasoline /Service Station are allowed additional signage due to the nature of their business activities. Consequently, one of these signs would be considered 'unique' while the remaining two would be considered legally non - conforming, as they are assumed to have been legally erected prior to annexation to the City of Tukwila in March, 1989. Further complicating the signage question at Lewis and Clark are the number of businesses that are advertised on each sign. The freestanding sign on Pacific Hwy. advertises the businesses by name, while the S. 160th sign only names the 'uses'. / l(Jn .Snllthr ontpr Rrmlovarrl Srrlry itl nn • Ty4Fuilla WachlnaMn OR I RR • 17/1141 .f 7 t_7A7l1 • roe.. 17nAI r.'2AAr ': ' 10/26/98 MON 14:57 FAX 425 455 8165 STERLING REALTY ORG. 140004 August 27, 1998 Jim Henry Re: Sign Amortization program Page Two While every business that obtains a license to operate in Tukwila is allowed signage as referenced above, only one additional freestanding sign is allowed (TMC 19.32.140D) on a parcel where the site has: • At least 400 linear feet of frontage on a public street • The site has at least two detached commercially occupied buildings, neither of which are accessory to the other • The site is occupied by at least two tenants According to our records, all of the referenced uses at Lewis and Clark share only one building and all are located en the same parcel. Accordingly, only one freestanding sign for these uses would be permitted. Hopefully, this analysis addresses the questions you had about freestanding signage at these two sites. If you have any further questions you may contact myself or Deborah Ritter, the Planner who will be processing sign applications for this project. Sincerely, Michael Jenkins Assistant Planner cc: Rebecca Riesen . • a:111 00 0 tWI 1-. Nu..; wo gQ =• d e-- 0 z I- w w o- .0 t- w uj • 0 Li_ O L1I z U o z City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Prepared August 20, 1998 Hearing Date: August 27, 1998 Notification of Public Hearing: Mailed 500 flyers to businesses believed to have non- conforming signage, property owners of land on which those businesses are located and all sign companies that have applied for sign permits in the past 2 years. Publication in South County Journal, Highline Times, Chamber of Commerce Newsletter and Hwy 99 Task Force Newsletter. File Number: L98 -0042 (Code Amendment) E98 -0018 (SEPA) Applicant: City of Tukwila Request: Add an amortization period for non - conforming signs to the Tukwila Sign Code and revise or repeal existing portions of the Sign Code which are made superfluous by the proposal. Location: City -wide Comprehensive Plan Designation: N/A Zoning District: N/A SEPA: Determination of Non - Significance STAFF: Deborah Ritter, Michael Jenkins ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft Ordinance B. Amortization Program Flyer C. Open House Materials D. Comment Letters: - McDonald's Corporation E. SEPA Determination, Checklist and Staff Memo 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431 -3665 L98- 0042/E98 -0018 Sign Code Amendment Page 2 FINDINGS Background Since the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, there has been considerable discussion about sign amortization. In 1996, the Commission proposed an amortization program which was recommended to the City Council but never adopted. The City Council did, however, slightly modify how non - conforming signs are treated by prohibiting the refacing of non - conforming signs (Ordinance 1792). Over the past six months, some property owners and new businesses have expressed dissatisfaction with sections of the sign code that pertain to non - conforming signage. They have asked the Commission to modify portions of the sign code and to re- examine the amortization of non - conforming signage in a manner that is equitable yet flexible. Working with Staff, the Commission has drafted a proposal for a Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program. This program is designed to achieve amortization gradually, through incentives for early action on the part of business and property owners. The program's flexibility will allow for the continued use and re -use of non - conforming signage during the amortization period. By the end of the program (7V2 years after program adoption) all non- conforming signage in the City would be brought into conformance. The following is a brief overview of the major elements of the amortization program. All time periods commence at adoption of the ordinance. • All illegal signs must be conforming within 6 months. • All non - conforming off - premises signs must be conforming within 18 months. Property owners with non - conforming signage may elect to execute a Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement ( "VSR "). The compliance period under a VSR varies from 4'/2 to 7'/2 years in length. The length of the compliance period is based on a formula. This formula provides bonuses for the early removal of freestanding signs. • Property owners with non- conforming signage who do not enter into a VSR Agreement have three years to meet compliance. L98- 0042/E98 -0018 Sign Code Amendment Page 3 The owner of any non - conforming sign which was installed prior to 1969 may apply for exemption from the requirements of the program under the Landmark Sign section of the draft ordinance. Additionally, the following revisions are proposed to the existing sign code, as follows: • Clarify the definitions of "off- premises" and "on- premises ". Add a definition for "premises ". Delete TMC 19.12.050(2)(c) and repeal TMC 19.28.030 and TMC 19.28.040. The amortization tools provided in these sections would no longer be needed if full compliance is achieved over time via the Staged Compliance Program. A copy of the proposed amendments and revisions are attached. Decision Criteria The proposed program is in keeping with Goals 8.1.14 and 8.1.15 of Tukwila's 1995 Comprehensive Plan, which read as follows: Goal 8.1,14: Reduce the dominance and clutter of signs through amortization of existing signs and replacement in compliance with Tukwila's Sign Code. Goal 8.1.15: Preserve signs that are exceptional and significant. CONCLUSIONS The proposed amendments and revisions to the Tukwila Municipal Code require that non- conforming signs come into conformity with Tukwila's regulations within a specified period of time, ranging from 3 to 71/2 years in length. The proposed program will reduce the visual clutter created by existing, non - conforming signage in Tukwila's commercial areas while preserving significant "landmark" signs. It will provide a flexible and equitable process for amortization which will be applied to all businesses with non - conforming signage. This amortization program ' L98- 00421E98 -0018 Sign Code Amendment Page 4 may be viewed as one part of the City's on -going effort to redevelop and improve those areas that have been annexed into Tukwila over the past decade. RECOMMENDATION Upon closing of the Public Hearing, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission set a time for deliberation and development of their recommendation to the City Council regarding the Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Ordinance. z W' 6 U" o O' W • I W• 0 L. < Wes. = d. w I- o Z �- w O • H W', F- • O' UQ O ~ Z "" STAGED COMPLIANCE SIGN AMORTIZATION ORDINANCE Amend TMC Chapter 19.08 DEFINITIONS 19.08.130 Off - Premises Sign: Any sign which is not on the same premises as the business with which it is identified or which cannot be classified as an on- premises sign under TMC 18.08.140. 19.08.140 On- Premises Sign: A sign which displays advertising copy specifically related to the primary use of the premises on which it is located, including signs or sign devices indicating the business transacted at, services rendered, goods sold or produced on the immediate premises, name of the business, person, firm or corporation occupying the premises, including signs with adjustable copy known as readerboards. Said sign must be on the same premises as the business with which it is identified. 19.08.171 Premises: A physically separate and distinct parcel of property. also known as a "Lot" (as it is defined in TMC 18.06.500). Revise TMC Chapter 19.12 PERMITS Modify TMC 19.12.050(2): 2. Repainting or cleaning of an advertising structure shall not be considered an erection or alteration which requires a sign permit unless: a. a structural or electrical change is made; or b. the area or the shape of the sign is altered; sf Repeal TMC 19.28.030 advertising copy or measagc thereon. ns of the -sus a valid-building-permit from the City ray remain in use until suo„-=;,me that the sign identifies; or rected legally in n, or which -has lldig DRAFT 8/20/98 permit from the City; Page 1 icense or ATTACHMENT A ctructure. Exceptions: Easily replaceabl -'- - - •. .I -! Repeal TMC 19.28.040 Upon closure and vacation of a business or activity, the owner of said business or activ-il -shall .ch the signs are located shall remove the signs within 60 days legate Amend TMC Title 19 by Adding Chapter 19.29 "STAGED COMPLIANCE SIGN AMORTIZATION PROGRAM" Chapter 19.29 Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program 19.29.010 General The Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program is a phased program designed to bring all signage in the City of Tukwila into conformance within a defined time period. The ordinance was adopted on [January 1. 1999]. All decisions regarding the Staged Sign Amortization Program are Type 2 decisions under TMC 18.104.010(C) and may be appealed to the Planning Commission under TMC Chapter 18.116. 19.29.020 Removal - Non - Conforming Off- Premises Signs All non - conforming signs which are off - premises at the time of the adoption of the Staged Compliance Ordinance must be removed or brought into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards within eighteen months after the date of the adoption of the ordinance. This length of time, known as the Compliance Period for Non - Conforming Off - Premises Signs expires on [June 30, 2000]. 19.29.030 Removal - Non- Conforming On- Premises Signs 11 non -c•n ormin• i.ns which ar- on- .remises a h- ime of the ado ion of he Sta•ed Com•liance Ordinance must be removed or brought into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards within the three year Base Amortization Period. The Base Amortization Period begins on [January 1, 1999] and expires on December 1 2001 . Businesses en -rin. into a Volunta Si. n Reduction A• ree en ( "VSR ") will be allowed additional time beyond the Base Amortization Period. The VSR Agreement is an agreement between a land owner and the City of Tukwila regarding non- conforming on- premises signage. This agreement allows an extended time period of a soecified lenath to either remove this signage or bring it into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards. 19.29.040 Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreements Any non - conforming on- premises sign covered by a VSR Agreement will be allowed an Extended Compliance Period beyond the three year Base Amortization Period. Applications are available from the Department of Community Development and will be processed free of charge. The application deadline DRAFT 8/20/98 Page 2 19,29.090 Landmark Sign Exemption In an effort to retain signs that are considered to be local landmarks in e oif•ru'n• as- .- e.em• e• from he r- .uiremen of he Program. All decisions regarding Landmark Sign Exemptions are Type 4 decisions made by the Planning Commission under TMC 18.104.010(E). a ed • • f Tu wila ce a non- is ce Si •n ' u ortiza on A. Eligibility n -x- • on f on i- - • -d • ,•li -nc- ion A for any non- conforming sign so long as the sign meets all of the criteria for Landmark Signs as established by the City of Tukwila. iza io Pr •• ra be r -•u- ted B. C, Exemption Criteria desi•n -d a Landm -rk S'• a ion m s s -tis all of the followin •. criteria: 1. It is at least 30 years old. 2. It has been unaltered or unchanged since its original installation. 3. It is representative of the prevailing signage which existed at the time of 2s installation. containing elements that are architecturally or visually significant such as lettering, logos or figures, stylized framing, color and /or neon. 4. It meets the provisions of TMC 19.12.110 regarding safety, maintenance and repair of signage. As of the date of this ordinance. the following signs have been granted a Landmark Sign Exemption by the Tukwila Planning Commission: The Riverside Inn roof sign at 14060 Interurban Avenue (installed 1968) Ben Carol Motel freestanding sign at 14110 Pacific Highway South (installed 1942) Trudy's Tavern freestanding sign at 15037 Pacific Highway South (installed (1939) Procedure All a••licatio s for Landmark Sian E em o ion mus be submited b June 30 1999. Applications are available from the Department of Community Development and will be processed free of charge, D. Loss of Exemption A Landmark Sign will lose its exemption under either of the following conditions: 1, The sign is altered or changed after issuance of its Landmark Sign Exemption. 2, The sign no longer meets the provisions of TMC 19.12.110 regarding safety. maintenance and repair of signage. DRAFT 8/20/98 Amend TMC 18.104.010(C) and (E) Modify TMC 18.104.010(C) Type 2 Decisions The chart shown in this section of the Zoning Code wojild be amended to include the following: Type of Permit Initial Decision Maker Appeal Body (open record appeal) Substitution of Community Planning Commission Signage under VSR Agreements Development Director (TMC 19,29.060) Modify TMC 18.104.010(E) Type 4 Decisions The chart shown in this section of the Zoning Code would be amended to include the following: Type of Permit Initial Decision Maker Appeal Body (closed record appeal) Landmark Sign Planning Commission City Council Exemption (TMC 19.29.090) DRAFT 8/20/98 Page 5 .:..; YEARS. STAGED COMPLIANCE SIGN AMORTIZATION ORDINANCE SAMPLE TIMELINE End of Full compliance date amortization period for properties not subject Aggressive action for non -conforming to VSR's- (end of Base Full Compliance Date Full Compliance Date Full Compliance Date on illegal signs off -premises signs Amortization Period) for 30% VSR's' for 45% VSR's" for 60% VSR's* 6/30/99 6/30/00 12/31/01 6/30/03 12/31/04 6/30/06 0 0.5 ' 1.5 'Staged Compliance" Last date for Ordinance Adopted approval & 1/1/99 execution of VSR's" 6/30/00 Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreements 8/20/98 DRAFT 3.0 Deadline for implementation of VSR's" 12/31/01 4.5 6.0 7.5 FULL COMPLIANCE WITH TUKWILA SIGN CODE NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. August, 1998 City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director OPEN HOUSES AND PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SIGN CODE AMENDMENTS The Tukwila Planning Commission is considering changes to the City's sign regulations. If these changes are approved by the Planning Commission, they will be recommended to the City Council for adoption. Under the City's current ordinances, permanent signs that were legally erected but do not comply with current rules and regulations (concerning size, location, number per business, etc.) may remain in use indefinitely. Currently, such permanent signs enjoy "grandfathered" or "non- conforming use" rights until there is a substantial change in the use of the property, buildings or signs, a change in tenancy or the closure of a business. The most common example of "grandfathered" permanent signs are those built to King County standards in areas that were later annexed to Tukwila. The Planning Commission is currently considering changes that would require the. removal of these non - conforming permanent signs within a maximum of 71/2 years if the revisions are approved and adopted by the City Council. The proposal, called the Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program, would establish a graduated timetable for the removal of permanent signage which is non - conforming. This process is sometimes referred to as "amortization ". The program allows for the continued use and re -use of permanent non - conforming signage during the amortization period. The purpose of the program is to bring all permanent non - conforming signage in the City into compliance by the end of the amortization program (71/2 years after program adoption). Property owners with permanent signage that is non - conforming may elect to execute a Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement ( "VSR "). The compliance period under a "VSR" varies from 41/z to 7'/ years in length. The length of the compliance period is based on a formula that provides bonuses for the early removal of non- conforming freestanding signs. Property owners with permanent non - conforming signage who do not enter into a "VSR" Agreement will have three years to meet compliance. Staff from the Tukwila Department of Community Development will conduct two Open Houses on August 11th and 12th at Foster Commons. These Open Houses will provide an opportunity to present the proposed changes and to answer your questions. The Planning-Commission has tentatively scheduled a public hearing on August 27th at 7 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. OPEN HOUSE AUGUST 11, 1998 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. Foster Commons Foster High School 4242 S. 144th OPEN HOUSE AUGUST 12, 1998 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. Foster Commons Foster High School 4242 S. 144th PUBLIC HEARING AUGUST 27, 1998 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers Tukwila City Hall 6200 Southcenter Blvd. For further information, please contact Deborah Ritter, Assistant Planner in the Tukwila Department of Community Development at 206 - 431 -3663. ATTACHMENT B 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431 -3665 :. �Ffr Purpose of Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program • Acts on direction from City's Comprehensive Plan to develop a process for removing non - conforming and illegal signs Improves the look of commercial areas in Tukwila, including o Pacific Hwy. ♦ Interurban Ave ♦ Manufacturing /industrial Center ♦ Urban Center Applies to all businesses in Tukwila that do not meet current Sign Code Provides time frame for affected businesses to plan for removal and /or replacement of signs • Provides process for signs to be granted `landmark' exemption, depending upon • age ♦ condition ♦ materials 4 style ATTACHMENT C What is an Illegal Sign? ♦ Any sign installed without a permit prior to annexation into the City of Tukwila ♦ Any sign installed without a permit after the creation of Tukwila's Sign Code What is a Legally Non- Conforming Sign? ♦ Any sign installed with a sign permit from King County or the City of Renton before annexation into the City of Tukwila ♦ Any sign installed with a sign permit prior to any changes in Tukwila's Sign Code or related regulations that made the size or placement of the sign not meet city code z <w ce 6 U O • CO 0 W = J • LL wo 2 gQ co d. Iw Z= �o z w • F- W W: z z What is an Off - Premises Sign? Any sign that advertises your business but is not on the same parcel or lot as your business What is a Freestanding Sign? Freestanding signs are not mounted to the wall of a building and are typically attached to a pole or sit on top of a concrete, brick or wood base What is a Landmark Sign? A landmark sign is designated by the Planning Commission and must: o be at least 30 years old s be unaltered since originally installed ♦ have distinct architectural or visual elements in lettering, logo, color or materials ♦ meet current safety, maintenance and repair standards What does `Sign Amortization' mean? Sign Amortization means a non - conforming sign or signs can be removed over an agreed time period instead of at one time Example of nonconforming permanent wall signs There are too many wail signs Example of nonconforming permanent wall sign �--- 30 Feet --Is' Sign is nonconforming because it is too large ' Z �W 2 00 N O WI J f— W0 g 2 0. I- W Z= i- O Z F- W U - O o1- Ww U, Z':. vj i =: 0 1- z Example of nonconforming freestanding sign Side 5 Ft Walk R Sign is nonconforming because it is ▪ tailer than the building (must be same height or lower) ■ too close to property lines (must be set back same distance as height) :- Example of nonconforming freestanding sign Street —10' 8I SIGN Side 5 F Walk Street ISldewalkl SIGN 7-80 sf sign Building Elevation View Building Plan View Sign is nonconforming because the face is too big (only 50sf per face at this site) What is a Voluntary Sign Reduction agreement A Voluntary Sign Reduction (VSR) agreement is between the property owner and City of Tukwila. The VSR identifies your non - conforming signs and when those signs need to comply with the sign code Why sign a VSR? A VSR allows for a longer time period to remove non- conforming signage or to bring them into sign code compliance How do I enter the VSR program? If eligible, a land owner must sign an agreement with the city to remove some signs now and the remaining over a period of up to 7 1/2 years What if the land owner does not want to sign a VSR agreement? Land owners who do not sign a VSR agreement will have a maximum of three years from the beginning of the program to remove their non - conforming signs. '� aN31Nf1000 3H1 dO AllidflO 3H1 013la SI 113OI10N SIH. NVH12IV3i0 SS31 SI3 NV Id SIH. NI 1N3Wf1000 3Hl JI :30110N;: Timeline Without Voluntary Sign Reduction (VSR) Agreement All Illegal Ordinance Signs Adopted Removed Ordinance Adopted 6 Months All Off Premises Signs Removed 18 Months All Nonconforming Signs Removed 3 Years Timeline With Voluntary Sign Reduction (VSR) Agreement Last Date For VSR Approval 18 Months Fgll Full Deadline to Compliance Compliance Remove all for 30% for 45% Noncomforming Signs Reduction Reduction 3 Years 4.5 Years Full Compliance for 60% Reduction 7.5 Years 08/12/98 'VED 13:30 FAX 425 8249359 McDonald's go August 12, 1998 McDonald's Corp. Planning Commission c/o Department of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 2001 McDonald's Corporation 10220 N.E. Points Drive Suite 300 Kirkland, Washington 98033 -7865 425/827 -9700 Fax: 425/828.8807 Dear Commissioners: On behalf of McDonald's Corporation and our franchise operators, Mr. Robert Comiskey and Mr. Fred Schultz, we wish to express our opposition to the proposed sign code amendments which are now under discussion. Signage is an extremely critical component of the quick service food business due to the "impulse nature of our customers. Surveys have confirmed that over 70% of fast food users did not intend to stop at a McDonald's restaurant prior to starting out on their trip. Various traffic engineering consultants have verified that excellent visibility indicating the presence of a business gives potential customers adequate lead time to make the decision to enter and execute safe traffic maneuvers. I myself have had difficulty when driving and looking for a specific business if the signage is too small or all the signs in the shopping center are of the same type, style and color. By seeing a business location too late to make a safe turn, potential customers then pass by and the business is lost. This especially holds true where businesses with nationally recognized brand names and logos are not allowed to be used. The McDonald's double arch logo, lighted roof beams and letters and architecture of the mansard roof are integral in our customers' instant recognition of our business. In past similar situations in the Puget Sound area when sign codes have been revised, and we have experienced a reduction In height or square footage of existing signage, our sales suffer significantly. This can be verified. As a direct result, tax revenues decrease to the respective jurisdictions that receive them. A decrease in sales also results in a reduction in workforce. We oppose amending the current sign ordinance. Sincerely, uelyn Davis Real Estate Representative . ATTACHMENT D CITY OF TLIKWILA DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS) DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: CITY -WIDE AMORTIZATION FOR NON - CONFORMING SIGNS PROPONENT: DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LOCATION OF PROPOSAL, INCLUDING STREET ADDRESS, IF ANY: ADDRESS: 6200 SOUTHCENTER BL PARCEL NO: 359700 -0232 SEC/TWN/RNG: LEAD AGENCY: CITY OF TLIKWILA FILE NO: E98 -0018 The City has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21c.030(2)(c). This decision was made 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. ******** ************************************* * ** * * **** ** **** ** ** * * **:k ** ** ** This det ermination is final and signed this n 1998. L, Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official City of Tukwila. (206) 431 -3670 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 93133 day s,5i` Copies of the procedures for SEPA appeals are available with the Department of Community Development. ATTACHMENT E re J U. 00 W= wo ga W f- z� I- O w ~, V O N 0 I- W W. F- w Z V- O • � Z To: From: Date: Re: City of Tukwila John W Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMORANDUM Steve Lancaster Deborah Ritter'j�� August 13, 1998 E98 -0018 Proposed amendments to Tukwila Sign Code Project Description: This is a non - project proposal to amend Tukwila's Sign Code (Title 19) to include an amortization program for non - conforming signage. The program is in keeping with Goals 8.1.14 and 8.1.15 of Tukwila's 1995 Comprehensive Plan, which read as follows: Goal 8,1.14: Reduce the dominance and clutter of signs through amortization of existing signs and replacement in compliance with Tukwila's Sign Code. Goal 8.1.15: Preserve signs that are exceptional and significant. The proposed changes to the Sign Code are as follows: The addition of an amortization provision in the Tukwila Sign Code to insure a gradual replacement of non- conforming signs throughout the City. This ordinance would establish a grace period within which owners would be allowed to maintain existing non - conforming signs in order to derive a reasonable benefit from their sign investment. All non - conforming signs still remaining after expiration of the grace period would be removed. The grace period varies in length from 3 years (minimum) to 7 -1/2 years (maximum). The length of each grace period is determined by the total amount of non - conforming signage to be removed at a particular location as well as the timing of its removal. An exemption process for landmark signs is provided. Agencies with Jurisdiction: None. Summary of Primary Impacts: None. Recommendation: Determination of Non - Significance. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax. (206) 431-3665 CITY OF TUKWILA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Not applicable. 2. Name of applicant: Department of Community Development, City of Tukwila 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 6300 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 Date checklist prepared: July 14, 1998 . Agency requesting checklist: Department of Community Development, City of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Adoption by the City Council in December, 1998 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No Page 1 z • W: J U' 00 co 0 w= J H; w 0 ga 5, u. = Fi• g, z� I- 0 z F- 111 uj U D O S O F-' wW u" 0 Z w co 0 H 0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Sign Amortization Program E98 -0018 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. A Determination of Non - Significance was issued by the City of Tukwila on September 23, 1996 in connection with a previous proposal to amortize non - conforming signage in the City. 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. None known. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. Approval by the Tukwila City Council. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. Section E requires a complete description of the objectives and alternates of your proposal and should not be summarized here. This is a non - project proposal to amend Tukwila's Sign Code (Title 19) to include an amortization program for non - conforming signage. The proposed changes are as follows: The addition of an amortization provision in the Tukwila Sign Code to insure a gradual replacement of non - conforming signs throughout the City. This ordinance would establish a grace period within which owners would be allowed to maintain existing non - conforming signs in order to derive a reasonable benefit from their sign investment. All non - conforming signs still remaining after expiration of the grace period would be removed. 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. If 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. Page 2 { � ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Sign Amortization Program E98 -0018 Not applicable. 13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? w No. cc B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS UO ° Ww- N 1. Earth I O a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, w steep slopes, mountainous, other: Not applicable. 1 ci �w b. What is the steepest slope on the site (a pproximate percent z 0 H slope)? LLI w Not applicable. O- c. What general ° u g types. of soils are found on the site (for example, w w' clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of I=- agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. `—` ~' o: z. Not applicable. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Not applicable. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Not applicable. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. Page 3 Z ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Sign Amortization Program E98 -0018 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. Not applicable. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. Not applicable. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Not applicable. 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. Not applicable. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. Not applicable. Describe waste materials 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 animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. Not applicable. 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. Page 5 ►V�� kA k ■ Sign Amortization Program E98 -0018 Not applicable. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Not applicable. 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: Not applicable. b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Not applicable. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Not applicable. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Not applicable. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Sign Amortization Program E98 -0018 5. Animals a. Circle any birds or animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Not applicable. Birds: . Mammals: Fish: Other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be near the site. Not applicable. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Not applicable. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Not applicable. on or 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. Not applicable. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. 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: Not applicable. Page 7 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Sign Amortization Program E98-001 8 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, w describe. J U O 0 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. co i° J CO L wO 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: u. Not applicable. F W z= b. Noise z o uj 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your n project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? o o 1- ww ci 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or u_ o. associated with the project on a short-term or Tong -term z, U CI)! basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? o Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Not applicable. Not applicable. Not applicable. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Not applicable. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Not applicable. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Not applicable. c. Describe any structures on the site. Not applicable. Page 8 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Sign Amortization Program E98 -0018 d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Not applicable. 1 e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? ~ w. g ite . � � Not applicable. 0 J o f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? W Not applicable. w 0. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program g designation of the site? N a Not applicable. _. z� Z g M; Not applicable. o cn' g I- . H w wU wp -0 CU z` - ='. Approximately how man y peo p le would the com p leted project ~' z ' displace? Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Not applicable. . Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Not applicable. Page 9 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Sign Amortization Program E98 -0018 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing? z The proposal does not increase or decrease the number of multi - family • z housing units within the City limits. 6 b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? co o o Y� d . � o Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. w = Not applicable (see 9(a) above). n w0 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: g J Not applicable. Lt. a =w 10. Aesthetics o a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not w w including antennas; what is the principal exterior building n o material(s) proposed? o S U. h — b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or - o. wz U( — I o � z Not applicable. obstructed? Not applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Not applicable. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Not applicable. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Not applicable. c. What existing off -site sources of Tight or glare may affect your proposal? `? Page 10 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Sign Amortization Program E98 -0018 Not applicable. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Not applicable. 12. Recreation a. What designed and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Not applicable. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. Not applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Not applicable. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. Not applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Not applicable. Project specific impacts will be evaluated at the time of permit application. � ° v • u ► Sign Amortization Program, E98 -0018 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. Not applicable. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Not applicable. z w 6 .J O O 0 U) W =. w • 0 c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? u Not applicable. 1 d =w z i- d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or o improvements to existing roads or streets, not including 2 driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or 8 private). o No. ° w • w. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, u rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Cu z U co Not applicable. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. g. Not applicable. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Not applicable. 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. No. Page 12 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Sign Amortization Program E98 -0018 b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Not applicable. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. Not applicable. 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. Not applicable. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: ! e./3c'ra,L 1Q,`1 Date Submitted: C4Latvir 13 61 . Page 13 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Sign Amortization Program E98 -0018 D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR ALL PROJECT AND NON PROJECT PROPOSALS z The objectives and the alternative means of reaching the objectives for a re w proposal will be helpful in reviewing the foregoing items of the Environmental 0, Checklist. This information provides a general overall perspective of the o proposed action in the context of the environmental information provided and the w submitted plans, documents, supportive information, studies, etc. N u_ 1. What are the objectives of the proposal? w 0 The revisions to Title 19 of the Tukwila Municipal Code are designed to C.!..) d implement direction from the Tukwila City Council to reduce and ultimately z remove all illegal and legally non - conforming signage in Tukwila. o zt - ww 2. What are the alternative means of accomplishing these objectives? U o Continue to utilize City Staff to conduct code enforcement actions. ° w. w w , E- LL o. 3. Please compare the alternative means and indicate the preferred course of w U) U action: 0 z There are no alternatives to legislative acts that will allow the Municipal Code to be revised. 4. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? No. 5. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: Not applicable. Page 14 Attachment B (minutes of 8/27/98 Planning Commission Hearing) will be reviewed by the Commission on 9/24/98 If approved by the Commission, Attachment B will be forwarded to you on 9/25/98 z rx w.. D J0 00 c.0W J =' F— LO u: w 0. =w z1._ �o Z t- w uj U :0 N 0 F- uj Z —' IL I— Z LLI O ~' ° PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUG. 27, 1998 ATTACHMENT B Present: Grant Neiss, David Livermore, Kathryn Stetson, Henry Marvin, Bill Arthur, George Malina, Vern Meryhew. Representing the City Staff were: Jack Pace, Deborah Ritter, Michael Jenkins, Carol Lumb, Moira Bradshaw, and Gina Smith. Grant Neiss called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. Deborah Ritter briefed everyone on staff report (L98 -0042) The report contains the last draft of the proposed amendments to the Sign Code. Two open houses have been held and a SEPA determination of non - significance has been issued by the Director. Ritter reviewed what happened since the last work session on July 23, 1998. During that Work- Session, a typographical error was detected by the Commission in the text of the draft ordinance in section 19.29.10. The words "Hearing Examiner" should read "Planning Commission ". Staff worked with Bill Arthur and Vern Meryhew to conduct two Open Houses that were held at Foster Commons. At the August 11 Open House, nine citizens attended. On August 12, 8 citizens attended. The comments at both open houses focused on the individual impacts of the proposal on that person's business. There was one written comment letter from the local real estate office of Mcdonald's expressing their opposition to the amendment. Staff suggested that if the Commission would like to deliberates further on the text, that they do so after the close of the quasi-judicial hearing for Nextel. (which is the next item on the agenda.) Arthur informed Ritter that a correction to the Staff Report should be noted. The name of the publication "Highway 99 Task Force Newsletter" should be "Highway 99 Action Committee Newsletter ". Dwight McLean, 13015 38th Ave. S. Tukwila, WA with Econo Lodge and the Ramada McLean stated that he is co- chairmen of the Highway 99 Action Committee. McLean supports the change to add the 3 -7 year amortization period to the new sign code. He believes that this time period is good because it allows businesses time to determine what the future needs will be along the highway. McLean described the contrast between the buildings and structures in the Southcenter area and the businesses along the Highway Southcenter has large rectangular buildings with similar colors. The Highway has smaller structures with a variety of colors. Another consideration is the speed limit on the Highway is faster than the Southcenter area. When you compare the two business districts, the needs are very different, therefore, the sign codes should reflect the unique needs of the Highway McLean agrees that the current state of the sign situation on the Highway is a "mess ". And added that he would hope that the Planning Commission would use this extra 7 year amortization period to re- evaluate the ordinance to meet the unique needs of Highway 99. McLean reiterated that he supports the additional time that has been recommended in the proposed amendment. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 2 Susan Sampson, 1400 Talbot Rd. South #400, Renton, WA 98055 Sampson established that she was here on behalf of the Washington Sign Council and added that she will conclude her statement by submitting a written copy of her comments (exhibit A). The Washington Sign Council is a trade association of the people who design, manufacture, lease, sell, install, and maintain on premise signs especially outdoor electrical advertising signs. They are separate from the billboard industry. Sampson explained that many of the areas that would be largely affected by the proposal were annexed by the City of Tukwila. Upon annexation, the signs became lawful non - conforming signs. Through normal attrition, however, the signs would eventually be replaced either by: new owners, new models, customer preference change, style and service change, and/or new technology. If the City does nothing, under the existing code, those non - conforming signs eventually will be removed by attrition at no financial cost to the City. By contrast, if there is a program to remove the legal non - conforming signs on an accelerated schedule (such as the one proposed by this ordinance) there will be social, financial and legal down -sides for sign owners and the City. Several examples were given to illustrate these points. Sampson also stated that there are legal implications. She compared it to abatement because the business owner or investor does not have reasonable opportunity to realize his investment -based expectation. If the city requires a business to take his sign down before he has enjoyed realistically his investment, that can be regarded as "taking of property for which compensation is due" under the 5th and 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution. Under the Federal Income Tax code, an amortization period for a metal and masonry free - standing sign could extend to 19 years. Other examples were also presented as legal concerns (see exhibit A). Sampson added, that the size and placement requirements for the free - standing signs could adversely affect a business owners income because the smaller sign would reduce visibility and, subsequently, reduce revenue for that business. Also, there may be some First Amendment issues and Federal Trademark issues because of the implication to content of the signs that are being addressed in the proposed sign code. In conclusion, the Washington Sign Council recommends that the proposed changes to the Tukwila Sign Code undergo further study and the amortization provision be abandoned. George Malina asked Sampson where she got her figures regarding the life -span of a sign. Sampson said it was a Federal Tax Code. David Livermore asked if the IRS will allow up to 19 years to amortize, what is the minimum amortization period they allow? Sampson said that she did not know the details of the I.R.S. code. Bob Temple, 14212 Pacific Highway S. Tukwila, WA 98168, Country Vittles. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 3 Temple concurs with McClain stating that the 7 1/2 amortization period is reasonable and allows small businesses ample time to obtain the finances that would be necessary to bring the signs into compliance. Mike West, Southtown Auto Rebuild 14864 Pacific Highway S. West indicated that he too is in favor of requiring conforming signs and added that 7 years is extremely liberal. "The sooner we have a uniform look to the signs, especially on the Highway, the sooner the overall value, impression, and atmosphere of the area will improve." His main concern is that all the businesses are regulated equally and effectively so not just a few businesses are in compliance and business that are non - compliant are left with no enforcement action. The entire Highway looks like "garbage ". West said he does not have a problem with smaller, lower, and conforming signs. But he does not want to be the only one with that type of sign. NEISS CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING. Neiss asked weather the Commission wanted to continue the deliberations after the next hearing or close to deliberate now. MERYHEW SUGGESTED THAT THE COMMISSION WAIT TO DELIBERATE UNTIL AFTER THE NEXT HEARING. LIVERMORE CONCURRED. L98 -0024 Nextel Communications, Inc. Neiss swore in all those wishing to provide testimony. Kathy Stetson declared that she is an employee of AT &T Wireless Services. She doesn't feel this would influence her ability to make a decision on this matter, but if the applicant objects, she would step down. David Hall, 1920 East Calhoun, Seattle, WA 98112, Nextel Hall said that he had no objection. Arthur declared that his wife is an employee of GTE and he doesn't feel this relationship would affect his objectivity in this matter. If the applicant objects he would step down. Hall said that he had no objections. Michael Jenkins briefed everyone on the staff report stating that the applicant originally proposed the monopole to be located in the northwest corner of the property. This location was originally within a proposed right -of -way indicated in our capital improvement plan and accordingly the proposal was moved to the location represented in the attachment to the packet. Due to the proposed height and its visual impact on the surrounding properties, including the Tukwila Pond, staff requested the applicant provide a list of alternative sites, minimum coverage requirements, and opportunities for co- location in the area. z ~ w O 0 w = 1-- U) wo �< a =w t-= z1._ I- 0 zE- w • w U � o P- O I- w w. U_ 8 wz 0 z PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 4 Staff recommends that the Conditional Use Permit be approved with three conditions; not one only as printed in the staff report: 1. The monopole shall be limited in height to 50 ft. 2. The monopole should be designed to accommodate at least one additional telecommunications carrier. 3. The site plan should be revised to provide landscaping along the west property line, where existing landscaping is removed as a result of this project. Malina asked if the SEPA review was the same for 100 ft. monopole as well as for a 50 ft. monopole? Jenkins said that SEPA would not have been required had the proposal initially been brought in at 50 ft. State requires under the Department of Ecology rules a thresh how of 60 ft. Neiss asked what would be the impact of the coverage for the 100 versus 50 foot monopole. Jenkins referred the Commissioners to the attachments in the staff report which indicates the coverage area for a 100 ft. monopole extends beyond the city limits of Tukwila. The lower the antenna, the coverage area is denuded ultimately to a point of 50 ft. where the coverage is approximately defined by the city boundaries. Hall stated that Nextel's proposal is for a 100 foot monopole. That is the height that was determined to be necessary to meet all the coverage objectives for this sight. Initially Nextel did not feel they could make the recommendation of a 50 foot antenna work. However, they did what they could to re- analyze the situation in order to comply with the staffs recommendations. Hall reiterated that the a 75 - 100 ft. monopole would better meet their needs. They have, nonetheless, re- designed the structure by switching panels. Although the quality will be degraded and the coverage objectives will not be met, Nextel is prepared to voluntarily comply with the recommendations by staff as long as they can switch the 4 ft. panel antennas with the 8 ft. There was some discussion regarding other options available to get the coverage objectives that Nextel is looking for i.e., co- location. Nextel has exhausted all options which includes the cost - effectiveness of the project. It was explained that the actual height of the entire structure would be 54 feet - 50 foot pole with antennas extending 4 feet in height. Livermore also added that according to the drawings, Nextel had planned to start with a 100 foot monopole and eventually extend the antennas up to the maximum of 114 feet. Neiss asked if Nextel had considered other options to mitigate the visual impact of these antennas. Michael Lyons, 1700 Westlake Ave. N., Seattle, WA , D. Garvey and Associates (Nextel) Lyons summarized the research that Nextel has conducted regarding the placement and visual impact of the monopole. He also dispersed additional photos of the pole demonstrating the various vantage points PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 5 (exhibit B). He feels the photos indicate that the pole would blend into the urban center as designed with little impact. Marvin asked for further explanation regarding the negotiations between Southcenter Place and Nextel. Lyons explained that they pursued at great length that particular sight. But due to their future plans, they were unable to reach an agreement that they could enter into from a business stand point. There was more discussion on site location and other options that are available not only for Nextel but for the overall industry. There was a concern that the sites may eventually be "locked up ". Nextel is somewhat unique in its technology which makes their product in more demand. They have explored a variety of options that are available including co- location but because they offer not only a cellular phone but a two way radio feature, the specifications for their antennas are more limited. Livermore asked for more clarification on the height difference and coverage differences. More specifically what part of Tukwila is not covered with the 50 foot monopole. Derrick Deitz, 1750 112th Ave. NE C -100, Bellevue, WA 98064, Radio Frequency Engineer, Nextel. Deitz presented some current maps that are also included in the Planning Commission Packets which demonstrates how they came to the 100 ft. height determination. The 100 ft. prediction plot shows that there is coverage in the NW quadrant of the intersection of Highway 518 and I -5 which is one of the areas that lose signal with the 50 foot tower height. He said that they are concerned that with the height limitation of 50 feet they would not be able to meet their primary service area. They are designing the facility to provide in building coverage in the Southcenter Mall area and all major industrial areas in this vicinity. Deitz presented other plot diagrams to show that there is additional loss of adequate signal in the mall area with the 50 foot tower in relation to the 75 foot tower. There was no test done at 100 ft. Arthur asked if they are getting coverage in these areas at the present time with the existing facilities. Deitz explained that the coverage that exist now is very limited. Inside the mall the signals drop in and out. Arthur stated that he has used Nextel products in the mall area and received a quality signal even inside the mall. Deitz said that according to his tests, the quality of coverage outside the mall is better than inside. In addition, eventually the signal that is currently being used for inside the mall will be lost and this new facility will pick it up. He entered two more diagrams as exhibit C. Deitz stated that Nextel's primary concern due to the capacity demands on the network, is to have minimal balk calls. Neiss asked if there were any questions from the gallery, the staff, or rebuttals from the Commission. Jenkins then interjected that being that he has been working so closely with the applicant over the past few months, he is very familiar with the extenuating circumstances. The staff's concerns, however, have PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 6 been discussed extensively, specifically the height and location. He expressed his appreciation for the materials that the applicant prepared in a day which helped underscore their position. The applicants position is more clearly illustrated in exhibits B, and C. When you look at the predominant development pattern of the Tukwila Urban Center, the monopole appears as a needle in an otherwise low rise development pattern. Jenkins reminded everyone about the process. Any additional antenna that the applicant may want to add to the monopole would require an additional conditional use permit as staff presently interprets the zoning code. While attempting to achieve a balance with the applicant, The City's position is to take the need for coverage under consideration at the same time maintain appropriate development. Livermore thanked Jenkins for his staff report and added that the commissioners have put much thought into the 50 foot proposal. His concern, however, is that we may be putting too much concern into the coverage area extending beyond the City limits. He also added that Tukwila may be benefiting from the reciprocal coverage from other towers in other cities. Lyons pointed out that the photos of the needle that were disbursed do not give an accurate depiction of what it would actually look like. He said that they would paint it out in brown tones and work toward shades that would work with the building colors and vegetation. Hall added that if the 50 ft. monopole is approved, the change to the 8 ft. antenna is noted; so that there is no additional time lost in unnecessary proceedings. NEISS CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:30 p.m. Marvin explained the purpose of the Planning Commission. Although the electronic communication field is a technical field, and much research has been invested on behalf of this project in reference to coverage, one must still consider the goal of the Commission. There has been a lot of time, work, and money invested in the Tukwila Pond area. His concern is the appropriateness of this area for installation. Malina said that he appreciates the applicants willingness to compromise by down - sizing to the 50 ft. monopole and exchanging the 8 ft. antennas for the 4 ft. antennas. The coverage area of the 50 foot monopole includes their prime subscribers. He has no problem with the 50 ft. pole. Livermore agrees the 50 ft. pole would be sufficient. Anything higher would garbage up the visual appearance of the Pond area. Neiss also added that he appreciates all the effort, information, and willingness to compromise from Nextel. He supports the 50 ft. monopole with 8 ft. antennas and feels this is more appropriate for the area. Stetson said she also agrees. Meryhew stated that he is in opposition to most of the Commissioners. He feels the visual impact of the 100 ft. monopole would be same at 50 ft. And added that the 50 ft. pole would probably be more visible. The residents would not be affected because they are located so far from the structure. He stated that he PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES PAGE 7 supports Nextel's original proposal of the 100 ft. pole and 4 ft. antennas. He feels it would be less obtrusive to the neighborhood. Arthur said that he is sorry to see the monopole be constructed at any height. He feels with all the time and effort that has been exhausted to maintain a quality visual area, it is a shame to put this structure in this area. 50', however, is better than 100'. MALINA MADE A MOTION ON L -98 -0024 TO ACCEPT THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, STAFF'S FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS WITH AN ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATION TO ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT ANTENNAE TO THE 50 FT. MONOPOLE. STETSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION WAS APPROVED WITH TWO OPPOSED. Neiss called a five minute break at 8:45 p.m. The Commissioners began deliberations on the proposed Sign Code Amendment. There was some concern regarding First Amendment rights violations and other legal ramifications. It was made clear, however, that the proposed amendment does not regulate content but rather size, location, and number of signs. There have also been several discussions with the City Attorney, and the Assistant City Administrator, both of whom find no legal issues with the proposed amendment. Everyone concurred that the proposal sounded good and all of the proponents were business owners from the Highway who would be most affected by the new regulations. NEISS MADE A MOTION TO ACCEPT L98 -0042 & E98 -0018 TUKWILA'S SIGN CODE AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE AN AMORTIZATION PROGRAM FOR NON - CONFORMING SIGNAGE AND FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL. MERRYHEW SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. DIRECTOR'S REPORT A letter was passed around regarding Grant Neiss' request for 6 month extension as a Planning Commissioner due to his recent change of residency. Everyone was asked to sign the letter. Due to the change in personnel and the amount of meetings that are being held, the minutes are not up -to- date. There are presently 3 sets of back minutes that still have to be completed. It was proposed that the format change to more of an action minute style to reduce the time in preparation of the minutes. This will be on a trial basis. A review of this new process could take place in November to see how everyone feels about this. NEISS CLOSED THE MEETING AT 9:05 P.M. Respectfully Submitted, Gina Smith .� 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 R f-tlactTrIT c aUG 27 19 99 DEVELOPMENT BEFORE THE CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION RE: SIGN CODE AMENDMENTS BRIEF OF WASHINGTON SIGN COUNCIL I. COMMENTING PARTY This comment is provided by the Washington Sign Council, a trade association for businesses that design, manufacture, lease, sell, install, and maintain on premise signs, especially outdoor electrical advertising signs. The Washington Sign Association is affiliated with the International Sign Association. The Council also represents the interests of its customers and sign owners, who tend to be unaware of proposed changes to sign codes. II. RESPONSE REQUESTED The Washington Sign Council recommends that the Planning Commission's proposed "amortization" plan not be implemented because it is unnecessarily disruptive and costly. The problem it addresses can be treated naturally by market forces. Alternatively, if the Commission is unwilling to withdraw the plan, then the plan should be modified to (a) provide reasonable compensation to sign owners whose signs are abated; or (b) extend the "amortization" period to a commercially reasonable period, which may vary upon a sign -to -sign basis. SAMPSON & WILSON, INC, P.S. 1400 Talbot Road So. 0 Ste. 400 Renton, Washington 98055 -4282 Pierce County King County Facsimile (2 3) M4363 (425) 255.4aco (425) 255.4538 1 III. FACTUAL BACKGROUND OF RECOMMENDATIONS 2 By annexing portions of unincorporated King County, the City has encompassed 3 signs that were lawful under County codes when erected, but which do not conform to 4 the City's existing code. Thus, they are deemed to be lawful nonconforming signs. Under 5 the present code, nonconforming signs may remain in place and may be maintained. 6 However, when they are abandoned or significantly modified, they must be removed or 7 brought into exact compliance with existing code. Thus, nonconforming signs eventually 8 disappear from the cityscape as businesses cease operations or change names and 9 owners, as signs become obsolete due to changes of style and technology, as market 10 conditions and consumer preferences change, as signs wear out and are replaced by 11 newer, more efficient models, or as damage occurs to signs. Such removal by attrition 12 presents no cost to the City, no disruption to the business community, and incidently 13 generates very little business for the sign industry. 14 By contrast, a program to remove legal nonconforming signs on an accelerated 15 schedule has social, financial, and legal downsides. Socially, knowing that a sign must 16 come down soon, an owner has no incentive to maintain his sign in an attractive 17 condition. Given that his sign is removed, an owner becomes concerned that sign code 18 might change again, and his sign might be removable again. An owner has little incentive 19 to order and maintain a well designed attractive sign that constitutes a significant 20 investment. 21 The effectiveness of the sign is influenced by a multitude of factors, but a few of 22 the following are key: 23 1. The nature of the business advertised. Some businesses, including such 24 major motel chains as Motel 6, rely upon drop -in business, not reservations, for their 25 success, so that clearly visible signs are necessary. -2- SAMPSON & WILSON, INC, P.S. 1400 Talbot Road So. 0 Ste. 400 Renton, Washington 98055-4282 Pierce County King County Facsimile (z 3) e4S3-43a3 (425) 235 .000 (425) 275.4838 z ~ w Ir 2 00 (1)0. WI w• 0 Q =• d �w z= �o z�- w w 0 0 1- wW Li. F6- " w z o O • ~ z 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2. Access to the site once the sign becomes visible. A motorist needs to see a sign in time to change lanes and find the driveway before turning. For illustrations, see "Sign Regulation and the Mechanics of Visual Communication," by David Jones, copyright 1996 International Sign Association, Alexandria Virginia. 3. Visibility of a sign is affected by the legal speed on adjacent streets. The faster traffic moves, the narrower the visual field becomes for passing motorists. Signs that are set back too far from the roadway, and many wall signs, are no longer visible or useful. 4. Visibility is effected by letter size, with a rough rule of thumb being that one - inch letters are visible from about 40 feet. The faster traffic moves, the larger a sign must be to be seen and the closer to the roadway it needs to be. Financially impacted by the Toss of a sign, a business owner may be unable to afford a nice replacement. IV. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS Property Rights v. Amortization. Legally, the requirement that a sign be removed has clear consequences. A sign is "property." The government cannot deprive an owner of his property without paying him just compensation, according to the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution, a requirement that is applied to state and local governments by enactment of the Fourteenth Amendment. "Just compensation" is the value of a sign, and the value of a sign is far more then the cost to manufacture and erect a sign. Rather, the value of a sign is reflected in the business its draws. See, for example, 'The Economic Value of On- Premise Signage," copyright 1997 the International Sign Association and the California Electrical Sign Association. This study was carried out by the University of San Diego School of SAMPSON & WILSON, INC, P.S. 1400 Talbot Road So. O Ste. 400 Renton, Washington 98055.4282 Pierce County King County Facsimile (2 3) 5634353 (425) 255-4860 (ari) 235.4535 -3- 1 Business Administration and cites other related studies such as " The Economic Value of 2 on Premises Signs," by Raymond T. Anderson, 1983. 3 A sign code that requires a sign to be removed before the end of its useful life or 4 a sign code that is so restrictive that effective signage becomes impossible denies a sign 5 owner his property rights and is subject to the just compensation requirements for legal 6 deprivation of property. See, Agins v. City of Tiburon, 447 U.S. 255 (1980) regarding 7 regulatory taking; and Connoly v. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 475 U.S. 211 8 (1986) regarding factors determining whether there is a regulatory taking. If a major 9 portion of the property's value is lost, there is a regulatory taking. Moore v. City of Costa 10 Meca, 886 F.2d 260 (9th Cir. 1989). 11 The proposed changes to the Tukwila Code include 3 years for a sign to be 12 brought into conformance with the existing Code. Up to 7 1/2 years is allowed for 13 graduated compliance, but graduated compliance is only useful or practical for such a 14 nonconformity as an excessive number of wall signs. It is not feasible for free standing 15 pole signs to be reduced in height and set back further from the roadway on an 16 incremental basis requiring changes to the structure and its footings. 17 To allow a sign owner to keep his lawful nonconforming sign for only three years 18 and to call it "amortization" is not legally sufficient. To declare today that the sign must 19 come down in 3 years is not amortization at all; it is merely a delayed taking. Three years 20 is not enough to allow a sign owner to enjoy his investment -based expectations; rather, 21 it is a taking. Short blanket amortization periods have been held unreasonable in such 22 cases as National Advertising Company v. County of Monteray, 464 P.2d 33 (Cal. 1970). 23 Although amortization periods have been sustained in cases in other jurisdictions or 24 blanket time periods may be unreasonable when applied to individual signs. It may be 25 instructive to observe that under the Federal Income Tax Codes, an amortization period -4- SAMPSON & WILSON, INC., P.S. 1400 Talbot Road So. 0 Ste. 400 Renton, Washington 98055-4282 Pierce County King County Facsimile (253) 661 4363 (425) 23544600 (425) 2354838 1 for a metal and masonry free - standing sign that is an improvement to real property could 2 extend to 19 years, far more then the 3 years proposed by the City of Tukwila. IRC § 3 168(b) (2) (A) (i). 4 Frankly, most of the signs of interest to the Washington Sign Council are those 5 contained in commercial areas. Under the Tukwila City Code, in commercial zones where 6 signs will face other commercial or industrial zones, generally one free standing sign is 7 permitted for each site, with additional free - standing signs permitted for each 400 linear 8 feet of frontage on a public street if the site contains two or more detached buildings 9 occupied by at least two different tenants. Sign area is limited to 100 square feet with a 10 total 200 square feet for all sides (two sided signs only); and no one side may contain 11 more than 50% of the allowable sign area without further permitting decisions. Every free - 12 standing sign is limited to 35' in height (approximately two stories) but may not exceed 13 the height of the building it serves. Imposing these limitations could impose a substantial 14 changes on the existing major free - standing signs in annexed areas such as Pacific 15 Highway South. The new sign restrictions (Tukwila Municipal Code 19.32.140) would 16 result in costly losses for business owners and ineffective signage on premises. 17 Regulation of Sign Conent. Another feature of the Tukwila Code that would be 18 applied to commercial signs is a provision that patently limits the content of the sign, in 19 violation of the sign owner's rights. Tukwila Municipal Code 19.32.140 E provides that the 20 free standing sign shall contain no promotional copy but shall be limited to the name of 21 the company or the activity being identified and trademark or logo, except where an 22 approved readerboard is used." However, strong legal constraints apply to the 23 government's limitation on the content of signs. Although a government may limit the 24 number of signs that the owner of the premises may expose, may regulate the structure 25 of the sign including its height, and may regulate its placement on site, regulating the -5- SAMPSON & WILSON, INC, P.S. 1400 Talbot Road So. 0 Ste. 400 Renton, Washington 98055.4282 Pierce County King County Faaimlle (253} a (425) a5 -eaoo (4u1 z3s4838 !•}';:'�.!�' „ 1 content of sign is subject to the First Amendment Free Speech Protection of the United 2 State Constitution. Free speech, including commercial speech, may be regulated by the 3 government only with as minimal time place and manner regulations as are necessary to 4 protect a compelling governmental interest. See, for example, S.O.C. Inc. v. County of 5 Clark, 97 -15912 (9th Cir., August 14, 1998) The City of Tukwila should not expose sign 6 owners to regulation of sign content. 7 Registered Trademarks. Finally, the City should be aware that it is lawfully 8 prohibited from requiring a sign owner to modify the content of his sign if content 9 happens to be a federally registered trademark. Blockbuster v. The City of Tempe, 97- 10 15535 (9th Cir. 1997) . 11 V. CONCLUSION 12 In conclusion, it is the advice of the Washington Sign Council to the Planning 13 Commission that the proposed changes to the Tukwila Sign Code are legally insufficient 14 in the amortization prohibitions. Fairness to sign owners and reasonable compensation 15 is due. Moreover, the proposed sign restrictions are too limited for significant commercial 16 corridors such as Pacific Highway South. The Commission should avail itself of studies 17 regarding the valuation of on- premise signs and the ergonomic factors that make signage 18 efficient, and should assure that any restrictions on signage it imposes still allows signage 19 that is effective considering the speed of passing traffic. 20 The Washington Sign Council is willing to assist the Planning Commission in 21 procuring copies of valid studies regarding sign design that will enable the planning 22 Commission to enact a useful and lawful sign code that is not. intrusive on the rights of 23 sign owners. 24 25 -6- SAMPSON & WILSON, INC., P.S. 1400 Talbot Road So. O Ste. 400 Renton, Washington 98055 -4282 Pierce County King County Facsimile cm) 063-+365 (425) asaeao (425) 2154630 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Respectfully submitted this 27th day of August, 1998. z z I 6? U 0 t U0' cnw _WI I W 0; g Q 2a I- W z2 1- 0 W Lu O • — 0 I— W LLJ H U _z ui FU 2: z From: Michael Jenkins To: Deborah, Steve, Jack Date: 9/24/98 11:08am Subject: Sign Code revisions - call from Highline Times Terry Stevens, a reporter from the Highline Times called me today about the proposed changes to the sign code. She wanted to know what the program was about. I briefly explained to her about bringing legally non- conforming signs into compliance, problems with equity concerning examples like BP next to Larry's in our annexation areas. I spent some time reiterating the public process, including Hwy 99 task force involvement, SKC Chamber, the open houses, PC approval and the upcoming open houses and City Council hearings. I also asked her to include Deb and my name in her article if people want to call and the department telephone number. We'll see what happens) ,. : MEMORANDUM TO: Jack, Steve, feb FROM: Michael J DATE: August 17, 1998 RE: Time devoted to reviewing non - conforming sign questions At the time of the sign amortization meeting, I was requested by three separate business owners to evaluate their freestanding signage and inform each if their signs conform to the code. As more of these requests are made of staff, particularly if the sign amortization program is adopted and implemented, the issue of staffing to accommodate these requests will become important. Accordingly, the following is a breakdown of the activities and amount of time to develop a letter to Wes Goodell of SeaTac Truck concerning his non - conforming freestanding signs: • Review non - conforming sign inventory • Check Sierra for outstanding RFA's or other actions • Do site visit to confirm conditions • Check assessors and zoning maps to confirm location • Draft letter to business owner detailing issues Total time: 1.5 hours Number of non - conforming freestanding signs in inventory: 187 Approximate staff time to devote to project: 280.5 hours Z August 17, 1998 Z Wes Goodell SeaTac Truck Center U o' 11000 Pacific Hwy S. ` w �, Tukwila, WA 98168 -0848 • w w 0 Re: Sign Amortization program 2 g Q. Dear Mr. Goodell: • d Thank you for attending the Open House on August 11, 1998. We appreciate your ? F- comments and concerns about the proposed sign code amendments. At the time of the z o. meeting, you had requested that I review our files concerning the signage at your business 2 �. in terms of compliance with the existing sign code. 0 co 0 0 H It appears that you have four (4) freestanding signs on your property, which is comprised = v:. of two separate tax lots of record. In regard to the questions that you raised concerning ~ �. your freestanding sign, it appears that the signs do not comply with the City of Tukwila's u z'. sign code. As these signs appear to have been erected prior to the annexation of the v property into the City of Tukwila, they are considered legal non - conforming signs. This o ±' is based on our assumption that the signs were given permits by King County. Z Under the sign code (TMC 19.32.140), businesses similar to yours are allowed one wall sign and one freestanding sign or two wall signs and no freestanding sign. The height and dimension of the wall signs are based upon the wall area of the corresponding wall. Freestanding signs are permitted based upon the linear feet of street frontage, may not be taller than the building, must be on the same parcel, and have to be setback from all property lines a distance equal to the sign height. A copy of the code is attached. If you have any other questions, feel free to contact me or Deborah Ritter, the planner in charge of the sign amortization project, at 431 -3670. Sincerely, Michael Jenkins Assistant Planner rgMcDonald's An August 12, 1998 Planning Commission c/o Department of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Dear Commissioners: AUG 13 1998 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT McDonald's Corporation 10220 N.E. Points Drive Suite 300 Kirkland, Washington 98033 -7865 425/827 -9700 Fax: 425/828 -8807 On behalf of McDonald's Corporation and our franchise operators, Mr. Robert Comiskey and Mr. Fred Schultz, we wish to express our opposition to the proposed sign code amendments which are now under discussion. Signage is an extremely critical component of the quick service food business due to the "impulse" nature of our customers. Surveys have confirmed that over 70% of fast food users did not intend to stop at a McDonald's restaurant prior to starting out on their trip. Various traffic engineering consultants have verified that excellent visibility indicating the presence of a business gives potential customers adequate lead time to make the decision to enter and execute safe traffic maneuvers. I myself have had difficulty when driving and looking for a specific business if the signage is too small or all the signs in the shopping center are of the same type, style and color. By seeing a business location too late to make a safe turn, potential customers then pass by and the business is lost. This especially holds true where businesses with nationally recognized brand names and logos are not allowed to be used. The McDonald's double arch logo, lighted roof beams and letters and architecture of the mansard roof are integral in our customers' instant recognition of our business. In past similar situations in the Puget Sound area when sign codes have been revised, and we have experienced a reduction in height or square footage of existing signage, our sales suffer significantly. This can be verified. As a direct result, tax revenues decrease to the respective jurisdictions that receive them. A decrease in sales also results in a reduction in workforce. We oppose amending the current sign ordinance. Sincerely, J uelyn Davis Real Estate Representative • 08/12/98 WED 13:30 FAX 425 828 9359 McDonald's Corp. lwcDOnaldS o. August 12, 1998 Planning Commission c/o Department of Community Development City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Dear Commissioners: On behalf of McDonald's Corporation and our franchise operators, Mr. Robert Comiskey and Mr. Fred Schultz, we wish to express our opposition to the proposed sign code amendments which are now under discussion. Signage Is an extremely critical component of the quick service food business due to the "impulse" nature of our customers. Surveys have confirmed that over 70% of fast food users did not intend to stop at a McDonald's restaurant prior to starting out on their trip. Various traffic engineering consultants have verified that excellent visibility indicating the presence of a business gives potential customers adequate lead time to make the decision to enter and execute safe traffic maneuvers. 1 myself have had difficulty when driving and looking for a specific business if the signage is too small or all the signs in the shopping center are of the same type, style and color. By seeing a business location too late to make a safe turn, potential customers then pass by and the business is lost. This especially holds true where businesses with nationally recognized brand names and beams and lettle�s and architecture of the mansard double arch logo, lighted roof rd roof are integral in our customers' instant recognition of our business. In past similar situations in the Puget Sound area when sign codes have been revised, and we have experienced a reduction in height or square footage of existing signage, our sales suffer significantly. This can be verified. As a direct result, tax revenues decrease to the respective juf fCi ions that receive them. A decrease in sales also results in a reduction in wo We oppose amending the current sign ordinance. Sincerely, uelyn Davis Real Estate Representative 08/12/98 WED 13:30 FAX 425 828 9359 McDonald's Corp. N CDOnald'S kb • Own. McDonald's Corporation 10220 N.E. Points Drive Suite 300 Kirkland, Washington 98033 -7865 425/827 -9700 Fax: 425/828.8807 August 12, 1998 z t=- z Planning Commission c/o Department of Community Development o o City of Tukwila co 0 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite #100 J w Tukwila, WA 98188 CO w w0 u_Q On behalf of McDonald's Corporation and our franchise operators, Mr. Robert c a Comiskey and Mr. Fred Schultz, we wish to express our opposition to the proposed I i sign code amendments which are now under discussion. z F- o Z 1— Dear Commissioners: Signage Is an extremely critical component of the quick service food business due to the "impulse" nature of our customers. Surveys have confirmed that over 70% of fast food users did not intend to stop at a McDonald's restaurant prior to starting out on their trip. Various traffic engineering consultants have verified that excellent visibility indicating the presence of a business gives potential customers adequate lead time to make the decision to enter and execute safe traffic maneuvers. I myself have had difficulty when driving and looking for a specific business if the signage is too small or all the signs in the shopping center are of the same type, style and color. By seeing a business location too late to make a safe tum, potential customers then pass by and the business is lost. This especially holds true where businesses with nationally recognized brand names and logos are not allowed to be used. The McDonald's double arch logo, lighted roof beams and letters and architecture of the mansard roof are integral in our customers' instant recognition of our business. In past similar situations in the Puget Sound area when sign codes have been revised, and we have experienced a reduction In height or square footage of existing signage, our sales suffer significantly. This can be verified. As a direct result, tax revenues decrease to the respective jurisdictions that receive them. A decrease in sales also results in a reduction in workforce. We oppose amending the current sign ordinance. Sincerely, uelyn Davis Real Estate Representative z TO: Planning Staff FROM: Deb Ritter DATE: August 12, 1998 RE: Sign Amortization Program Materials Used at August Open Houses Attached are copies of the materials developed by Michael, Sharon and myself to help staff explain the proposed amortization program. If anyone at the counter has questions about the proposed program, please refer them to me (or in my absence, Michael or Carol). I suggest that we provide copies of these materials only as a supplement to any one -on -one explanation of the proposed program. If these materials are distributed without some type of background information, a citizen may mistakenly presume that the requirements automatically apply to them or that the program has already become part of the code. For this reason, I have a stack of the materials on my desk, rather than at the front counter. : z. Z H' F- w 2 J U U O' c W= J H w0 -J = a. w z� 1- 0 z 2 uj UO O N' wuj H U. U.. h0 LIIZ O 1- z YEARS- STAGED COMPLIANCE SIGN AMORTIZATION ORDINANCE SAMPLE TIMELINE End of Full compliance date amortization period for properties not subject Aggressive action for non - conforming to VSR's* (end of Base Full Compliance Date Full Compliance Date Full Compliance Date on illegal signs off- premises signs Amortization Period) for 30% VSR's* for 45% VSR's* for 60% VSR's* 6/30/99 6/30/00 12/31/01 6/30/03 12/31/04 6/30/06 0 0.5 "Staged Compliance" Ordinance Adopted 1/1/99 * Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreements 7/23/98 DRAFT 1.5 3.0 Last date for Deadline for approval & implementation execution of of VSR's* VSR's* 12/31/01 6/30/00 4.5 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. 6.0 7.5 FULL COMPLIANCE WITH TUKWILA SIGN CODE STAGED COMPLIANCE SIGN AMORTIZATION ORDINANCE DEFINITIONS Off- Premises Sign: Any sign which is not on the same premises as the business with which it is identified or which cannot be classified as an on- premises sign under TMC 18.08.140. On- Premises Sign: A sign which displays advertising copy specifically related to the primary use of the premises on which it is located, including signs or sign devices indicating the business transacted at, services rendered, goods sold or produced on the immediate premises, name of the business, person, firm or corporation occupying the premises, including signs with adjustable copy known as readerboards. Said s'gn must be on the same premises as the business with which it is identified. Premises: A physically separate and distinct parcel of property. also known as a "Lot' (as it is defined in TMC 18.06.500). REVISIONS TO EXISTING SIGN CODE TEXT Modify TMC 19.12.050(2): 2. Repainting or cleaning of an advertising structure shall not be considered an erection or alteration which requires a sign permit unless: a. a structural or electrical change is made; or b. the area or the shape of the sign is altered, Modify Repeal TMC 19.28.030 7/23/98 DRAFT �'•: Repeal TMC 19.28.040 7/23/98 DRAFT 2 Z �• Z! 6_ U 0, W= J F -. W 0. =d F_ W Z H. I- 0 Z 2 U O O D- O I- W W H U' LL S. li l Z' F - • _'' O ~: Z z STAGED COMPLIANCE SIGN AMORTIZATION ORDINANCE F z ce w AMENDMENTS TO EXISTING SIGN CODE TEXT Chapter 19.29 Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program v o co 19.29.010 General The Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program is a phased program designed to bring all signage in t=—. the City of Tukwila into conformance within a defined time period. The ordinance was adopted on L'— [January 1, 1999]. All decisions regarding the Staged Sign Amortization Program are Type 2 decisions w O. 2 under TMC 18.104.010(C) and may be appealed to the Planning Commission under TMC Chapter 18.116. a 19.29.020 Removal - Non - Conforming Off - Premises Signs to All non - conforming signs which are off - premises at the time of the adoption of the Staged Compliance i.. Ordinance must be removed or brought into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards within r z eighteen months after the date of the adoption of the ordinance. This length of time, known as the H O Compliance Period for Non - Conforming Off - Premises Signs expires on [June 30, 2000]. w in 19.29.030 Removal - Non - Conforming On- Premises Signs 0 All non - conforming signs which are on- premises at the time of the adoption of the Staged Compliance 0'- Ordinance must be removed or brought into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards within the w three year Base Amortization Period. The Base Amortization Period begins on [January 1, 1999] and U expires on [December 31, 2001]. Businesses entering into a Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement u. O ( "VSR ") will be allowed additional time beyond the Base Amortization Period. . Z U� The VSR Agreement is an agreement between a land owner and the City of Tukwila regarding non- conforming on- premises signage. This agreement allows an extended time period of a specified length to Z either remove this signage or bring it into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards. 19.29.040 Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreements Any non- conforming on- premises sign covered by a VSR Agreement will be allowed an Extended Compliance Period beyond the three year Base Amortization Period. Applications are available from the Department of Community Development and will be processed free of charge. The application deadline will be established by staff. The approval and execution of all VSR's will occur no later than [June 30, 2000]. The implementation deadline for all approved and executed VSR's is [December 31, 2001]. 19.29.050 Extended Compliance Periods Under Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement The extended Compliance Period for non - conforming on- premises signs covered by a Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement is determined using the Percent of Reduction formula. This formula reflects the reduction in non - conforming signage on a premises (expressed as a percentage) as of December 31, 2001. It is used on a per premises basis to determine the Extended Compliance Period for non- conforming on- premises signs. The reduction in the total square footage of all non - conforming signage to be reduced is divided by the total square footage of all non - conforming signage. A 15% bonus is added to the resulting percentage for each non - conforming freestanding sign (if any) which has been removed or brought into compliance. 7/23/98 DRAFT Percent of Reduction equals Total non - conforming square footage reduced per the VSR Agreement Total non - conforming square footage before reduction A 15% bonus for each non- conforming freestanding sign removed or made conforming (if applicable) under the terms of the VSR The Percent of Reduction figure is then applied to a sliding scale, which establishes the duration of the extended Compliance Period, as follows. Establishing the Extended Compliance Period Percent of Reduction Duration of Extended Using Formula Compliance Period Less than 30% at least 30% but not more than 45% at least 45% but not more than 60% at least 60% and higher Not eligible for Extended Compliance Period 4.5 years (Base Amortization + 1.5 years) 6 years (Base Amortization + 3 years) 7.5 years (Base Amortization + 4.5 years) 19.29.060 Substitution of Signage under VSR Agreements Existing on- premises signage may be substituted with other new or existing signage so long as the substitution is part of a total reduction in non - conforming signage on the premises. Such substitution must be under the terms and conditions of an approved VSR Agreement and will require a permit. Substitution permits will be issued by the Department of Community Development as a Type 2 Decision under TMC 18.104.010(C). Substitution permits are subject to the Compliance Period stated in the applicable VSR Agreement. At the end of the Compliance Period, all signs on the premises must be in conformance with the Tukwila Sign Code. 19.29.070 Failure to Comply All non - conforming and illegal signs must be brought into conformance within the applicable Compliance Period. Any sign which remains illegal or non - conforming beyond the expiration date of the applicable Compliance Period will be subject to penalties under TMC 1.08.010. 19.29.080 Maintenance and Repair Nothing in this Chapter shall relieve the owner or user of a non - conforming sign from the provisions of this code regarding safety, maintenance and repair of signage. 19.29.090 Landmark Sign Exemption In an effort to retain signs that are considered to be local landmarks in the City of Tukwila, certain non- conforming signage may be exempted from the requirements of the Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program. All decisions regarding Landmark Sign Exemptions are Type 4 decisions made by the Planning Commission under TMC 18.104.010(E). A. Eligibility An exemption from the Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program may be requested for any non - conforming sign so Tong as the sign meets all of the criteria for Landmark Signs as established by the City of Tukwila. 7/23/98 DRAFT 2 B. Exemption Criteria C. To be designated a Landmark Sign, a sign must satisfy all of the following criteria: 1. It is at least 30 years old. 2. It has been unaltered or unchanged since its original installation. z 3. It is representative of the prevailing signage which existed at the time of its i Z. installation, containing elements that are architecturally or visually significant Ill re 2 such as lettering, logos or figures, stylized framing, color and /or neon. n 4. It meets the provisions of TMC 19.12.110 regarding safety, maintenance v v 0 and repair of signage. , u) o w= As of the date of this ordinance, the following signs have been granted a Landmark Sign N �' Exemption by the Tukwila Planning Commission: w O The Riverside Inn roof sign at 14060 Interurban Avenue (installed 1968) g Ben Carol Motel freestanding sign at 14110 Pacific Highway South (installed g 1942) Trudy's Tavern freestanding sign at 15037 Pacific Highway South (installed N a (1939) H _ zi- t— O zF- ww All applications for Landmark Sign Exemptions must be submitted by June 30, 1999. m Applications are available from the Department of Community Development and will be processed free of v _ charge. 0 F-'. = U` A Landmark Sign will lose its exemption under either of the following conditions: w z, F- _ . O F- z Procedure D. Loss of Exemption 1. The sign is altered or changed after issuance of its Landmark Sign Exemption. 2. The sign no longer meets the provisions of TMC 19.12.110 regarding safety, maintenance and repair of signage. 7/23/98 DRAFT 3 AMENDMENTS TO EXISTING ZONING CODE Modify TMC 18.104.010(C) Type 2 Decisions The chart shown in this section of the Zoning Code would be amended to include the following: Type of Permit Initial Decision Maker Appeal Body (open record appeal) Substitution of Signage under VSR Agreements (TMC 19.29.060) Community Development Director Planning Commission Modify TMC 18.104.010(E) Type 4 Decisions The chart shown in this section of the Zoning Code would be amended to include the following: Type of Permit Initial Decision Maker Appeal Body (closed record appeal) Landmark Sign Exemption (TMC 19.29.090) Planning Commission City Council 7/23/98 DRAFT 4 z w O - 0 moo; w =`. J F-, w0 u_¢ • d w Z = f- F- 0 w F-. • -' o � w w` 1--• 0; II-- 0; Z U =, O ~ �Z� August, 1998 City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director OPEN HOUSES AND PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SIGN CODE AMENDMENTS The Tukwila Planning Commission is considering changes to the City's sign regulations. If these changes are approved by the Planning Commission, they will be recommended to the City Council for adoption. Under the City's current ordinances, permanent signs that were legally erected but do not comply with current rules and regulations (concerning size, location, number per business, etc.) may remain in use indefinitely. Currently, such permanent signs enjoy "grandfathered" or "non- conforming use" rights until there is a substantial change in the use of the property, buildings or signs, a change in tenancy or the closure of a business. The most common example of " grandfathered" permanent signs are those built to King County standards in areas that were later annexed to Tukwila. The Planning Commission is currently considering changes that would require the removal of these non - conforming permanent signs within a maximum of 71/2 years if the revisions are approved and adopted by the City Council. The proposal, called the Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program, would establish a graduated timetable for the removal of permanent signage which is non - conforming. This process is sometimes referred to as "amortization ". The program allows for the continued use and re -use of permanent non - conforming signage during the amortization period. The purpose of the program is to bring all permanent non - conforming signage in the City into compliance by the end of the amortization program (7%2 years after program adoption). Property owners with permanent signage that is non - conforming may elect to execute a Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement ( "VSR "). The compliance period under a "VSR" varies from 4% to 7' years in length. The length of the compliance period is based on a formula that provides bonuses for the early removal of non- conforming freestanding signs. Property owners with permanent non - conforming signage who do not enter into a "VSR" Agreement will have three years to meet compliance. Staff from the Tukwila Department of Community Development will conduct two Open Houses on August 11th and 12th at Foster Commons. These Open Houses will provide an opportunity to present the proposed changes and to answer your questions. The Planning Commission has tentatively scheduled a public hearing on August 27th at 7 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. OPEN HOUSE AUGUST 11, 1998 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. Foster Commons Foster High School 4242 S. 144th OPEN HOUSE AUGUST 12, 1998 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. Foster Commons Foster High School 4242 S. 144th PUBLIC HEARING AUGUST 27, 1998 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers Tukwila City Hall 6200 Southcenter Blvd. For further information, please contact Deborah Ritter, Assistant Planner in the Tukwila Department of Community Development at 206 - 431 -3663. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Chamber of Commerce Insert In an effort to reduce and eliminate non - conforming signs in the City of Tukwila, the Planning Commission is developing an amortization plan. This plan, called the Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program, would gradually reduce the number of non- conforming signs using an incentive -based approach. The program provides a defined period within which all signage in the City would be brought into conformance while offering flexibility for the continued use and re -use of non - conforming signs during the amortization period. The Planning Commission is expected to recommend the Sign Amortization Program to the City Council for their review in the coming months. If you would like more information about the program, please contact Deborah Ritter, Assistant Planner in the Tukwila Department of Community Development at 206- 431 -3663. z C4 IL/2 JO U On w 2. F. wO 2 a; co =a. �w z� o. Z �- 2 �i U 0 to O 0 H Lu I U . Z. 01- z aETA COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC. August 5, 1998 Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner City of Tukwila Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Dear Ms. Ritter: 6.E EN AUG - 7 1998 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT We are in receipt of your letter dated July 24, 1998 regarding the proposed sign code amendments. As owners of the Annex @ Southcenter located at 301 Tukwila Parkway, we would like to know if our pylon and any of our other signs located on this property are affected by the new proposed sign code amendments. Specifically, are any of our signs, which were legally erected, considered to be "permanent non - conforming signs "? Please review and let me know as soon as possible. Thank you. Sincerely, Ginny Christofferson /gc 18827 BOTHELL WAY N.E., SUITE 110, BOTHELL, WA 98011 -1940 / (425) 482 -6626 / FAX (425) 482 -0330 ft--•00LI 35mm Drawing# Z W': re 0 U0' W=, F-, W 0 g 2d �W Z= I- 0 Z F— W U 0 O 03. 0 F- WW jr- al Z, co O RECEIVE /\UG - 6 1998 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WASHINGTON SIGN COUNCIL 3220 N.E. 160th / Seattle, WA 98155 (206) 368 -9363 / Fax (206) 365 -9076 August 4, 1998 Deborah Ritter, Assistant Planner Department of Community Development CITY OF TUKWILA 6300 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Subject: Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program Dear Deborah; I respectfully request that you research your files in regard to the Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program, and provide the Washington Sign Council with a list of the 260 business locations that the City of Tukwila has deemed to have non - conforming signs. In lieu of time constraints setforth in the dates you have scheduled Open Houses to present the proposed changes, this request is being sent to you via facsimile. It would be much appreciated if we could receive the requested information within five (5) days either by mail or facsimile (206) 365 -9076. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (206) 365 -9076. Sincerely, WASHINGTON SIGN COUNCIL 1^ William B. dine Executive Director WBK/alb . z F- w JU oo O t w= w o. 2 u_ a • w z� F- o w~ 2 U co o — • F- w II z Z w 0 0 z July 31, 1998 City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director William B. Kline Executive Director Washington Sign Council 3220 N.E. 160th Lake Forest Park, Washington 98155 RE: Mailing List for 7/24/98 Sign Amortization Program Flyer Dear Mr. Kline: Per your Request for Public Records, we are providing you with the above referenced mailing list. Please be advised that you are precluded from using this mailing list for commercial purposes. Sincerely, Deborah Ritter Assistant Planner Attachment 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 • - >".•-; • " FROM : Panasonic FAX SYSTEM PHONE NO. : JUL 30 '95 ea;5OPM -l;K.l.__H DCD /Pw Jul. 30 1998 03:06PM P1 P.2v2 DATE: NAME: ADDRESS: s ?,2.2 0 4'. /s‘ d REQUEST FOR PUBLIC RECORDS TYPE OF RECORDS YOU ARE REQUESTING: ❑ Building Permit ❑ Mechanical Permit ❑ Utility PIans ❑ Building plans ❑ Utility Permit ❑ Land Use File SITE ADDRESS: PLEASE DESCRIBE IN AS MUCH DETAIL AS POSSIBLE WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR OR NEED COPIES QF: retrYZ YOUR REQUEST FOR PUBLIC RECORDS WILL BE RESPONDED TO WITHIN FIVE WORKING DAYS. .' A F F I D A V I T I, Gcd Pti (4774414 fl Notice of Public Hearing J Notice of Public Meeting 0 Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet 0 Board of Appeals Agenda Packet OPlanning Commission Agenda Packet Short Subdivision Agenda Packet O Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit flShoreline Management Permit O F D I S T R I B U T I O N hereby declare that: 0 Determination of Non - significance Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance ODetermination of Significance and Scoping Notice 0 Notice of Action fl Official Notice Other []Other was mailed to each of the following addresses o 30G W Name of Project(sh i4 „Abut, Signat File Number (704-24A‘,711,J1:-.0/r,N- ;( z �w CC UO CO o. W_ F.. w O: LQ. =d I- w. Z= z0 w U • 0' O N w w' • U� U. z' o 2: OH z A F F I D A V I T O F D I S T R I B U T I O N I , W - ChZf( hereby declare that : Li Notice of Public Hearing Li Notice of Public Meeting Li Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet LiBoard of Appeals Agenda Packet JJPlanning Commission Agenda Packet 0 Short Subdivision Agenda Packet Q Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit flShoreline Management Permit flDetermination of Non - significance LI Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance flDetermination of Significance and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Action J Official Notice Li Other 01 672_4.4 . qze.b/c;, A 2 .;777 L Other was mailed to each of the following Dai-i-eJa5 rss .' /4 6 ce_o=�- S (a <( -/36' addresses on 7/3(-)' FK • /, &,eeta- 121, (4)761.- ffOc-).3 Name of Pro ject /kflcp5$h`2*OMKSignature File Number July 24, 1998 City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director OPEN HOUSES AND PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SIGN CODE AMENDMENTS The Tukwila Planning Commission is considering changes to the City's sign regulations. If these changes are approved by the Planning Commission, they will be recommended to the City Council for adoption. Under the City's current ordinances, permanent signs that were legally erected but do not comply with current rules and regulations (concerning size, location, number per business, etc.) may remain in use indefinitely. Currently, such permanent signs enjoy "grandfathered" or "non- conforming use" rights until there is a substantial change in the use of the property, buildings or signs, a change in tenancy or the closure of a business. The most common example of " grandfathered" permanent signs are those built to King County standards in areas that were later annexed to Tukwila. The Planning Commission is currently considering changes that would require the removal of these non - conforming permanent signs within a maximum of 7'/ years if the revisions are approved and adopted by the City Council. The proposal, called the Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program, would establish a graduated timetable for the removal of permanent signage which is non - conforming. This process is sometimes referred to as "amortization ". The program allows for the continued use and re -use of permanent non - conforming signage during the amortization period. The purpose of the program is to bring all permanent non - conforming signage in the City into compliance by the end of the amortization program (71/2 years after program adoption). Property owners with permanent signage that is non - conforming may elect to execute a Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement ( "VSR "). The compliance period under a "VSR" varies from 4' to 71/2 years in length. The length of the compliance period is based on a formula that provides bonuses for the early removal of non- conforming freestanding signs. Property owners with permanent non - conforming signage who do not enter into a "VSR" Agreement will have three years to meet compliance. Staff from the Tukwila Department of Community Development will conduct two Open Houses on August 11th and 12th at Foster Commons. These Open Houses will provide an opportunity to present the proposed changes and to answer your questions. The Planning Commission has tentatively scheduled a public hearing on August 27th at 7 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. OPEN HOUSE AUGUST 11, 1998 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. Foster Commons Foster High School 4242 S. 144th OPEN HOUSE AUGUST 12, 1998 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. Foster Commons Foster High School 4242 S. 144th PUBLIC HEARING AUGUST 27, 1998 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers Tukwila City Hall 6200 Southcenter Blvd. For further information, please contact Deborah Ritter, Assistant Planner in the Tukwila Department of Community Development at 206 - 431 -3663. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 A F F I D A V I T rt0,s1 Ste; LI Notice of Public Hearing O Notice of Public Meeting O Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet O Board of Appeals Agenda Packet Planning Commission Agenda Packet 0 Short Subdivision Agenda Packet O Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit jJShoreline Management Permit was mailed to ach of the following addresses on 6%b c-°t¢Qi Svs ) bO S ,a ' - /41'° , 1-4a C/ q ''los- /5?-7 O F D I S T R I B U T I O N hereby declare that: ODetermination of Non - significance LI Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance flDetermination of Significance and Scoping Notice O Notice of Action LI Official Notice 'Other DuSs- /Y_, ctrl 6h fbsed slj� G'ade 4ir J s f Other 79/9P> Name of Pro j ect Proposed Srgq Cede 141K0n,497 Signature File Number : A F F I D A V I T 1, ilidreAl S-6 (her 0 Notice of Public Hearing 0 Notice of Public Meeting 0 Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet 0 Board of Appeals Agenda Packet OPlanning Commission Agenda Packet 0 Short Subdivision Agenda Packet 0 Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit 0 Shoreline Management Permit O F D I S T R I B U T I O N hereby declare that: 0 Determination of Non - significance 0 Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance flDetermination of Significance and Scoping Notice fl Notice of Action 0 Official Notice Other a91,,,, JYJu SQ 4- P(,c d�� tha,o h Proposal S,y h dod e //-,,,a-f1 ikaiA 0 Other was mailed to each of the following addresses on 60-cA4 Name of Project 4 ad, ! 0842f Signature File Number z et : Wiz. CC 61i .J U O 0 U0 w= — F- �_ W. WO u. co a I-W Z= Z o' W ui U0 O co- 0 H; Z 0 LL O: z W O z City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director July 24, 1998 OPEN HOUSES AND PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SIGN CODE AMENDMENTS The Tukwila Planning Commission is considering changes to the City's sign regulations. If these changes are approved by the Planning Commission, they will be recommended to the City Council for adoption. Under the City's current ordinances, permanent signs that were legally erected but do not comply with current rules and regulations (concerning size, location, number per business, etc.) may remain in use indefinitely. Currently, such permanent signs enjoy "grandfathered" or "non- conforming use" rights until there is a substantial change in the use of the property, buildings or signs, a change in tenancy or the closure of a business. The most common example of "grandfathered" permanent signs are those built to King County standards in areas that were later annexed to Tukwila. The Planning Commission is currently considering changes that would require the removal of these non - conforming permanent signs within a maximum of 7' /z years if the revisions are approved and adopted by the City Council. The proposal, called the Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program, would establish a graduated timetable for the removal of permanent signage which is non - conforming. This process is sometimes referred to as ' "amortization ". The program allows for the continued use and re -use of permanent non - conforming signage during the amortization period. The purpose of the program is to bring all permanent non - conforming signage in the City into compliance by the end of the amortization program (71/2 years after program adoption). Property owners with permanent signage that is non - conforming may elect to execute a Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement ( "VSR "). The compliance period under a "VSR" varies from 4'/2 to 7'/2 years in length. The length of the compliance period is based on a formula that provides bonuses for the early removal of non- conforming freestanding signs. Property owners with permanent non - conforming signage who do not enter into a "VSR" Agreement will have three years to meet compliance. Staff from the Tukwila Department of Community Development will conduct two Open. Houses on August 11th and 12th at Foster Commons. These Open Houses will provide an opportunity to present the proposed changes and to answer your questions. The Planning Commission has tentatively scheduled a public hearing on August 27th at 7 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. OPEN HOUSE AUGUST 11, 1998 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. Foster Commons Foster High School 4242 S. 144th OPEN HOUSE AUGUST 12, 1998 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. Foster Commons Foster High School 4242 S. 144th PUBLIC HEARING AUGUST 27, 1998 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers Tukwila City Hall 6200 Southcenter Blvd. For further information, please contact Deborah Ritter, Assistant Planner in the Tukwila Department of Community Development at 206 - 431 -3663. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 A F F I D A V I T O F D I S T R I B U T I O N .£ /» e-K hereby declare that: O Notice of Public Hearing O Notice of Public Meeting LIBoard of Adjustment Agenda Packet O Board of Appeals Agenda Packet flPlanning Commission Agenda Packet fl Short Subdivision Agenda Packet J Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit 0 Shoreline Management Permit ODetermination of Non - significance 0 Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance LiDetermination of Significance and Scoping Notice O Notice of Action 0 Official Notice A 4tt.Ce 4 /I2/ k;(/ 0h Other rottvice S )i) dock % F�gdh, Erg 7's O Other was mailed to each of the following addresses on -77c9V96 . Name of Project y4SC' / Cd k 14116 d- §ignature OtZt File Number The City of Tukwila Department of Community Development has scheduled two Open Houses to present proposed changes to the City's sign regulations. The Open Houses will be held in Foster Commons (at Foster High School) on August 11th from 4 to 7 p.m. and August 12th from 7 to 9 p.m. The Tukwila Planning Commission has tentatively scheduled a public hearing regarding the proposed changes on August 27th at 7 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. If you have any questions, please contact Deborah Ritter, Assistant Planner at 206 - 431 -3663. z _1- F'w Ce 6 UQto W = F- U) fir. w < 0.. H w Z� I- 0 Z I- U 0' N= 0 I -: I=I wJ' 1- V _ Z,. 0 C Ham;. o z City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director TO: Planning Commission FROM: Steve Lancaster �(, wo �cjT DATE: July 17, 1998 RE: Issues Regarding Sign Amortization Program for Discussion at July 23rd Work Session Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Ordinance During its June 25th work session, the Commission redlined portions of the draft ordinance and asked staff to incorporate these changes. Additionally, the Commission asked staff to draft new language for landmark sign exemptions. The changes and additions are reflected in the attached draft. During the course of our research on landmark signs we received an article entitled "Sign Controls for Historic Signs" from the American Planning Association. We have attached a copy for your reference. Staff met with Bill Arthur and Vern Meryhew on July 2nd. This meeting was to clarify how existing, on- premises signage could be substituted with new or existing signage under the guidelines of the proposed Amortization Program. Under this scenario, substitutions would be permitted so long as they are part of a total reduction in non - conforming signage on a premises. Substitutions would be implemented under an approved Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement and would only be valid during the applicable Compliance Period. Staff has added language to the draft ordinance which addresses this scenario (see attached). Next Step The Commission asked staff to propose a tentative schedule for public outreach. Assuming that the Planning Commission finalizes and adopts the draft ordinance during its July 23rd work session, staff proposes the following schedule: Open House Open House August 27th Tuesday, August 11th from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. at Foster Commons Wednesday, August 12th from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. at Foster Commons Update to Planning Commission regarding Open Houses Public Hearing on Sign Amortization Ordinance 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 ■+. STAGED COMPLIANCE SIGN AMORTIZATION ORDINANCE DEFINITIONS Off- Premises Sign: Any sign which is not on the same premises as the business with which it is identified or which cannot be classified as an on- premises sign under TMC 18,08,140. On- Premises Sign: A sign which displays advertising copy specifically related to the primary use of the premises on which it is located, including signs or sign devices indicating the business transacted at, services rendered, goods sold or produced on the immediate premises, name of the business, person, firm or corporation occupying the premises, including signs with adjustable copy known as readerboards. Said sign must be on the same premises as the business with which it is identified. Premises: A physically separate and distinct parcel of property. also known as a "Lot" (as it is defined in TMC 18.06.500). REVISIONS TO EXISTING SIGN CODE TEXT Modify TMC 19.12.050(2): 2. Repainting or cleaning of an advertising structure shall not be considered an erection or alteration which requires a sign permit unless: a. a structural or electrical change is made; or b. the area or the shape of the sign is altered „or c. except as previded -by-- subsection (1) ab there is a change - in-the thereeo n- 1 Modify- ReoeaLTMC 19.28.030 1. There is a change in use of the ng that the sign identific • F 2. There are substantial cite rig exterier permit from- the -City; 7/9/98 DRAFT 3. There is- a- change- ie-the letter style, size, color,- badkgfsund- message o ign strudture- which- r-egu-ires manufasturi 'ed sign face -or strubture €xsestierrs: E-asi'y-replaseable- bills -ancl- letters as in the -base of ,. rtiaderbea investment in the sign shall- not -be- considered - modification- af-a -n age n ew em- sofl#eFmimg- sign:--Signs -not r tiring- a- permait as provided- in T ;nr,0 -, 12 0.1 and 19.12.050.2 shall- net -be- considered rmodifiGatism -ef,a- mom- soRfOr- Ming -sig gf e#-tiMe, any nor- senferm ing- permanent -sign- shall -be b ' •c requirements --o#- this - cede -or shall -b_ removed. Repeal TMC 19.28.040 Upon closure 311d-rasatien -Gf a business or- aetivity,the- .owner of said - business- sr - activity -shall have -30 - days - from- the - date- ef-alo gns- relating- te-the business or-activity. If • r-a " • - - - -•gbs- within -the- designated- timme- limit, then the -owner of the p signs- are - Iodates' ch ^n rtimove the signs-within-60-days rcrr+ic c sf e-p ,- Ir-h e-bwner of the property -e lebated- fails- te- rermeve- the - signs -wi lining- Direbtar- upon -duel e- ewnef's- expense AMENDMENTS TO EXISTING SIGN CODE TEXT Chapter 19.29 Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program 19.29.010 General The Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program is a phased program designed to bring all signage in the City of Tukwila into conformance within a defined time period. The ordinance was adopted on [January 1. 1999]. All decisions regarding the Staged Sign Amortization Program are Type 2 decisions 1. - 1: •' 1 1 • - b ale • o he _ unde TMC Cha. er 18 16 19.29.020 Removal - Non - Conforming Off - Premises Signs All non- conforming signs which are off - premises at the time of the adoption of the Staged Compliance Ordinance must be removed or brought into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards within eighteen months after the date of the adoption of the ordinance. This length of time known as the Compliance Period for Non - Conforming Off - Premises Signs expires on [June 30. 2000]. 19.29.030 Removal - Non - Conforming On- Premises Signs All non - conforming signs which are on- premises at the time of the adoption of the Staged Compliance Ordinance must be removed or brought into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards within the three year Base Amortization Period. The Base Amortization Period begins on [January 1 1999] and expires on [December 31. 2001]. Businesses entering into a Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement ( "VSR ") will be allowed additional time beyond the Base Amortization Period, The VSR 'greement is an agreement between a land owner and the City of Tukwila regarding non- conforming on- premises signage. This agreement allows an extended time period of a specified length to either remove this signage or bring it into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards. 19.29.040 Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreements Any non - conformi g on- premises sign covered by a VSR Agreement will be allowed an Extended Compliance Period beyond the three year Base Amortization Period. Applications are available from the Department of Community Development and will be process free of charge The application deadline will be established by staff, The approval and execution of all VSR's will occur no later than [June 30, 2000]. The implementation deadline for all approved and executed VSR's is [December 31 2001]. 7/9/98 DRAFT 2 19.29.050 Extended Compliance Periods Under Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement The extended Compliance Period for non - conforming on- premises signs covered by a Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement is determined using the Percent of Reduction formula. This formula reflects the reduction in non - conforming signage on a premises (expressed as a percentage) as of December 3• , 2001. It Ls_ used on a per premises basis to determine the Extended Compliance Period for non- conforming on- premises signs. The reduction in the total square footage of all non - conforming signage to be reduced is divided by the total square footage of all non- conforming signage. A 15% bonus is added to the resulting percentage for each non - conforming freestanding sign (if any) which has been removed or brought into compliance, Total non- conforming square footage reduced per the VSR Agreement Total non - conforming square footage before reduction Percent of Reduction equals A 15% bonus for each non- conforming freestanding sign removed or made conforming (if applicable) under the terms of the VSR The Percent of Reduction figure is then applied to a sliding scale. which establishes the duration of the extended Compliance Period. as follows. Percent of Reduction Establishing the Extended Compliance Period Duration of Extended Using Formula Less than 30% at least 30% but not more than 45% at least 45% but not more than 60% at least 60% and higher Compliance Period Not eligible for Extended Compliance Period 4.5 years (Base Amortization + 1 5 years) 6 years (Base Amortization + 3 years). 7.5 years (Base Amortization + 4 5 years) 19.29.060 Substitution of Signage under VSR Agreements Existing on- premises signage may be substituted with other new or existing signage so long as the substitution is part of a total reduction in non - conforming signage on the premises. Such substitution must be under the terms and conditions of an approved VSR Agreement and will require a permit. Substitution permits will be issued by the Department of Community Development as a Type 2 Decision under TMC 18.104,010(C), Substitution permits are subject to the Compliance Period stated in the applicable VSR Agreement, At the end of the Compliance Period. all signs on the premises must be in conformance with the Tukwila Sign Code, 19.29.070 Failure to Comply All non- conforming and illegal signs must be brought into conformance within the applicable Compliance Period. Any sign which remains illegal or non - conforming beyond the expiration date of the applicable ,Compliance Period will be subject to penalties under TMC 1.08,010. 19.29.080 Maintenance and Repair Nothing in this Chapter shall relieve the owner or user of a non - conforming sign from the provisions of this code regarding safe maintenance and repair of signage 7/9/98 DRAFT 3 19.29.090 Landmark Sign Exemption In an effort to retain signs that are considered to be local landmarks in the City of Tukwila certain non- conforming signage may be exempted from the requirements of the Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program. All decisions regarding Landmark Sign Exemptions are Type 4 decisions made by the Planning Commission under TIVIC 18.104.010(E), A. Eligibility i - a. -d o,. - •nAuo izaion • o• -, a •e •uesed for any non - conforming sign_so long as the sign meets all of the criteria for Landmark Signs as established by the City of Tukwila. xe 111 lb 1 0 u B. Exemption Criteria To be designated a Landmark Sign. a sign must satisfy all of the following criteria. 1, It is at least 30 years old. 2, It has been unaltered or unchanged since its original installation 3. It is representative of the prevailing signage which existed at the time of its installation. containing elements that are architecturally or visually significant such as lettering. logos or figures. stylized framing, color and /or neon. 4. It meets the provisions of TMC 19.12.110 regarding safety. maintenance and repair of signage. As of the date of this ordinance. the following signs have been granted a Landmark Sign Exemption by the Tukwila Planning Commission: The Riverside Inn roof sign at 14060 Interurban Avenue (installed 1968) Ben Carol Motel freestanding sign at 14110 Pacific Highway South (installed 1942) Tru_dy's Tavern freestanding sign at 15037 Pacific Highway South (installed (1939) C. Procedure All applications for Landmark Sign Exemptions must be submitted by June 30 1999. Applications are available from the Department of Community Development and will be processed free of charge, The Planning • •• fission may wish to consider adding the South City Motel si• , ' stalled in 1934. This sign was mentioned on page 131 of the acific Highway Revitalization Plan (see attached). D. Loss of Exemption A Landmark Sign will lose its exemption under either of the following conditions. 1. The sign is altered or changed after issuance of its Landmark Sign Exemption. T e • io l• • - -- h- ■r•v' i•l of 19. 2 10 r -.- d'n• - maintenance and repair of signage. 7/9/98 DRAFT , ' . ,>?�' AMENDMENTS TO EXISTING ZONING CODE Modify TMC 18.104.010(C) Type 2 Decisions The chart shown in this section of the Zoning Code would be amended to include the following: Type of Permit Initial Decision Maker Appeal Body (open record appeal) Substitution of Community Planning Commission Signage under VSR Agreements Development Director (TMC 19.29.060) Modify TMC 18.104.010(E) Type 4 Decisions The chart shown in this section of the Zoning Code would be amended to include the following: Type of Permit Initial Decision Maker Appeal Body (closed record appeal) Landmark Sign Planning Commission City Council Exemption (TMC 1929.090) 7/9/98 DRAFT 5 • 3 3 3 a a These solutions can be achieved through: 1. New design guidelines for the area; 2. Code amendments as required to supple- ment the design guidelines; 3. Reconstruction of the street; and 4. A sign amortization program. Signage Most of the commercial signs in the Pacific Highway corridor were designed and placed prior to the area's annexation to the City of Tukwila. They do not meet the City's sign code, and they do not do a good job in serving the Corridor. That is, they contribute to the visual clutter of the streetscape, which in turn results in decreased legibility for each business's individual signs. In a recent inventory of commercial signs in the Pacific Highway corridor (see Table 13: Highway 99 Sign Invento,y,) it was found that 72, or approximately 70 %, of the businesses along Pacific Highway do not meet the requirements of the City of Tukwila sign code. This means that either they have too many signs, their signs are too large, too high, too close to the front property line, or a combination of these factors. It will be difficult for many businesses along Pacific Highway to come into conformance with the City sign code. The most problematic situa- tion occurs when a pole sign is too close to the right - of -way. Pole signs are required to be no higher than the buildings they are associated with, and to be as far from the property frontage as they are high. Be- cause many of the structures along Pacific Highway are located close to the right -of- way, this leaves little room for pole signs. Yet many businesses need pole signs because their actual building face is estab- lished at an oblique angle to the roadway, and so can be seen well only from one direction. It is not equitable to require that new businesses (established since this area was annexed) comply with the sign code when so many existing businesses do not have to comply, due to the non - conforming sign allowance in Tukwila's sign code. Recommendation: The City should evaluate the impact of requiring compliance with the Sign Code for Pacific Highway businesses. It should then determine whether a modification ofthe sign code may be appropriate for the Pacific Highway corridor, and adopt an amortization program to ensure that all signs are upgraded and all sign regulations met within an established time frame that coincides with the completion of the Pacific Highway street improvements. Historic Preservation Historic and potentially historic properties in the Pacific Highway corridor have been identified in three historic property surveys. The first survey was conducted as part of the Environmental Impact Statement for the expansion of Sea -Tac International Airport, and was funded by the Airport Communi- ties Coalition, of which the City of Tukwila is a member. In this survey, completed in 1995, it'was recommended'that,three electric signs on. Pacific Highway:..be • recognize as local.Iandma d rks. Specifically, the report stated that the "signs are, "Excel- lent designs and last remnant of Pacific Highway's trucking past." The recognized signs,are the;Ben •Carol Motel sign (1942;) the South City Motel.sign (1934,)`and `" Trudy's Tavern sign; (1939). This report also recognizes the Newporter Motel (1942,) which it states is the "Last remaining 1940s motel on Pacific Highway South in original design condition." A Iso City of Tukwila 131 Z; s -J U: . . U O : 0 W I II--: cnu- wo ga • rn � =d F. w 'Z F- O • W LU w U 0 Oco •0 F- -. • Ww F=-V • u. P:' C) ..Z. • W •U= O~ • Z-• YEARS* End of amortization period Aggressive action for non-conforming on illegal signs off-premises signs 6/30/99 6/30/00 STAGED COMPLIANCE SIGN AMORTIZATION ORDINANCE SAMPLE TIMELINE Full compliance date for properties not subject to VSR's (end of Base Full Compliance Date Full Compliance Date Full Compliance Date Amortization Period) for 30% VSR's for 45% VSR's for 60% VSR's 12/31/01 6/30/03 12/31/04 6/30/06 0 0.5 1.5 3.0 "Staged Compliance" Last date for Deadline for Ordinance Adopted approval & implementation 1/1/99 execution of of VSR's VSR's 12/31/01 6/30/00 7/10/98 DRAFT 4.5 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. 6.0 7.5 FULL COMPLIANCE WITH TUKWILA SIGN CODE City of i ukwl`a John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director MEMO TO: Community and Parks Committee of the Tukwila City Council FROM: Steve Lancaster DATE: July 9, 1998 RE: Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Ordinance Since the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, there has been considerable discussion about sign amortization. In 1996, the Commission proposed an amortization program which was recommended to the City Council but never adopted. The City Council did, however, slightly modify how non - conforming signs are treated by prohibiting the refacing of non - conforming signs (Ordinance 1792). Over the past six months, some property owners and new businesses have expressed dissatisfaction with sections of the sign code that pertain to non - conforming signage. They have urged the Commission to modify portions of the sign code and to re- examine the amortization of non - conforming signage in a manner that is equitable yet flexible. In response to these requests and as part of the Commission's review of several sign - related matters, a different type of sign amortization program will be presented for consideration by the City Council later this summer. Concept The Planning Commission's proposal is to amend the sign code through the adoption of a Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Ordinance. This ordinance will achieve amortization gradually, through incentives for early action on the part of business and property owners. The program's flexibility will' allow for continued use and re -use of non - conforming signage during the amortization period. By the end of the amortization program (7'/z years after program adoption) all non - conforming signage in the City would be brought into conformance. The following is a brief overview of the major elements of the amortization program. All time periods commence at the adoption of the ordinance (see attached Sample Timeline): 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Community and Parks Committee July 9, 1998 Page 2 • All illegal signs must be conforming within 6 months. • All non - conforming off - premises signs must be conforming within 18 months. • Property owners with non - conforming signage may elect to execute a Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement ( "VSR "). The compliance period under a VSR varies from 41/2 to 71/z years in length. The length of the compliance period is based on a formula. This formula provides bonuses for the early removal of freestanding signs. Property owners with non - conforming signage who do not enter into a VSR Agreement have three years to meet compliance. Additionally, the Planning Commission proposes revisions to the existing sign code, as follows: • Clarify the definitions of "off- premises" and "on- premises ". • Add a definition for "premises ". Delete TMC 19.12.050(2)(c), TMC 19.28.030 and TMC 19.28.040. The amortization tools provided in these sections would no longer be needed if full compliance is achieved over time via the Staged Compliance program. What's Next The Planning Commission is scheduled to finalize its review of the ordinance language during its July 23rd work session. Staff anticipates that there will be two Open Houses scheduled for mid - August, followed by a Planning Commission public hearing at the end of August. �, , YEARS: STAGED COMPLIANCE SIGN AMORTIZATION ORDINANCE SAMPLE TIMELINE End of Full compliance date amortization period for properties not subject Aggressive action for non - conforming to VSR's (end of Base Full Compliance Date Full Compliance Date Full Compliance Date on illegal signs off - premises signs Amortization Period) for 30% VSR's for 45% VSR's for 60% VSR's 6/30/99 6/30/00 12/31/01 6/30/03 12/31/04 6/30/06 0 0.5 1.5 3.0 "Staged Compliance" Last date for Deadline for Ordinance Adopted approval & implementation 1/1/99 execution of of VSR's VSR's 12/31/01 • 6/30/00 7/9/98 DRAFT 4.5 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE _TO'THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. 6.0 7.5 FULL COMPLIANCE WITH TUKWILA SIGN CODE NATIONAL ALLIANCE of PRESERVATION COMMISSIONS P.O. BOX 1605 ATHENS, GEORGIA 30603 706/542 -4731 July 9, 1998 Ms. Deb Ritter City of Tukwila Planning Department 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Dear Ms. Ritter, RECEIVED JUL 1 3 1998 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Enclosed you will find some information concerning sign /billboard regulations. I couldn't find anything that directly addresses how to preserve historic automobile billboards without an ordinance, but a couple of these articles do pertain to historic sign preservation coupled with the regulation of new signage. There are also some examples of criteria /standards for signage regulation. I hope this will be of some help to you, and if you have any questions or comments please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, Winslow Hastie •. z Hw JU 0 ? W = w wo u_ Q =a w z� 1-o w F- no o - o F-: ww .. z. 0 '- 0 z MODEL ORDINANCE No single ordinance will serve all communities. Each ordinance should be adapted to the character of the community and the image to which it aspires. However, when it comes to billboards many com- munities have concluded that the best ordinance is one which bans all billboards and which requires the removal of any already in existence. Today over 1,000 U.S. cities and towns totally ban billboards; so do states like Vermont, Maine, Hawaii and Alaska. In recent years the trend has been for cities to ban the construction of all new billboards. Whether your city has 5,000 billboards or none, you can at least insure that billboard pollution doesn't get worse. A permanent moratorium on the erection of all new billboards will not improve your city's appearance overnight, but it will prevent the problem from spreading, and in time it will improve a community's appearance. When you propose a new sign ordinance you must expect opposition. The billboard industry routinely opposes any and all controls, regardless of how reasonable they may be. The industry employs lobbyists, lawyers, public relations experts, and others to oppose pollution controls at the federal, state, and local levels. If you do not have the political support to totally eliminate billboards you should work for an ordinance which places sensible limits on the size, height, placement and number of billboards in a community. The following are recommended provisions of a model billboard control ordinance. The Coalition. for Scenic Beauty can provide you with additional information about each of the model provisions and with sample ordinances from other cities. (I) Billboards should be a conditional use not a permitted use This means no billboard should be permitted without a public hearing and without notifying all adjacent property owners. (2) Billboards should be charged an annual permit fee of, at least $200 per sign structure. (3) No billboard company should be allowed to erect a new conforming billboard until it has removed an equal number of non- conforming billboards which it operates. (4) No billboards should be permitted in any residential district. (5) No billboards should be permitted in any historic district or agricultural district. (6) No billboards should be permitted in any neighborhood shopping district or in the downtown commercial core. (7) No billboards should be permitted on any designated scenic street, road, drive, parkway, or highway. (8) No billboard should be permitted within 750 feet of any residential district, historic district, park, school, church, hospital, retirement home, cemetery, convention center, or government building. (9) No billboard should be permitted on or over the roofs of buildings. (10) No billboard should be permitted at any bridge crossing or situated to impair any scenic vista. (11) No billboard should exceed 25 feet in height or 300 square feet in size. (12) There should be a minimum of 1,500 feet of spacing between billboards on primary roads and a minimum of 1,000 feet of spacing between billboards on secondary roads. (13) No billboard should be stacked over or placed next to any other billboard. (14) No billboard should be illuminated if it is within view of any residence. Fc 0i4difilitfoiia ldnformationtcont "fit' Coalition:forScenie Bea it*; 218 ;D:Street;:S,E:;:Washington, D C :20003 1202)'546;1;104% z re 2 00 w UJ J l— CO LL w 0: -J =d. l— _ 0 z 1— UO tn" 0 I- w Z'. ui 0' Appendix E* Signage Guidelines Signs A development plan shall require that the appearance, size, position, method of attachment, texture of materials, color, and design of such signs is in keeping with the collective characteristics of the structures located within the appropriate Historic Zoning District. Signs as may be allowed within an Historic Zoning District shall be further limited as follows: (a) Off -site signs shall not be permitted. (b) Business signs shall be limited to one (1) sign only for each street frontage per premises and shall not be over five (5) feet in height. (c) Maximum area of any sign located in an Historic Residential District shall be two (2) square feet; maximum area of any sign in an Historic Commercial District shall be sixteen (16) square feet. (d) No sign may extend above the top of the nearest facade, eaves, or firewall of a building or structure. (e) No sign that flashes, blinks, revolves, or is. put in motion by the atmosphere shall be permitted. No visible bulbs, neon tubing, luminous paints, or plastics will be permitted as a part of any sign. (f) Buildings and signs within the historic zone may be illuminated by remote light sources, provided that these light sources are shielded to protect adjacent properties. (g) Real estate signs shall be removed not more than ten (10) days after the closing of a sale of a house or lot. *From Historic Districts Zoning Regulations, Macon, Georgia. Beacon Hill Architectural Handbook Beacon Hill Civic Association Notes on sign design. (Excerpted from the Boston Sign Code) This sense of history and feeling of architectural unity is one of Boston's unique characteristics; it is attractive to both tourists and residents alike. And although nothing in the long run can replace the quality and character of a business concern's services or merchandise in drawing and keeping customers, the architecture of an individual building —and the combined impact of groups of adjoining buildings —can be part of the attraction of a shopping district. Ideally, then, to maximize the effectiveness of signs and building 108 / A Citizen's Preservation Guide architecture, every sign should be an integral —but, of course, noticeable —part of its building, and each building should be a good neighbor within its block of buildings. As a result, the building and its sign become part of an overall image, each supporting the other and helping to draw customers. This leads to. a simple but vital point: a sign on a building should always be thought of as part of the building and not as an unrelated object attached to it. Design criteria established by the Architectural Commission are as follows: 1. Graphics shall be limited to a single sign, excluding the introduc- tion of a projecting symbol. 2. Overhanging signs are generally discouraged except in the case where a flat sign cannot be appropriately mounted. 3. Trademarks shall be limited to 25 percent of sign area. 4. Paper signs attached to windows (announcing sales, etc.) are dis- couraged and under no circumstances are to be allowed beyond 15 days. 5. Lighting: back -lit signs are not allowed and shielded indirect light- ing should be encouraged. 6. Location: should be integrated architecturally with the building, or on an awning in accordance with the zoning code limitations. In no case should a sign applied to the building obscure architectural detailing on the building face. 7. Restoration of free - standing signs is discouraged. In closing, something should be said about two of the most important aspects of sign design —the choice of colors and the choice of lettering. A few basic rules may help to simplify the task of choosing from the almost ,unlimited range of colors and letter styles available: 1. Do not use too many colors on a sign. Too many colors can work against each other and detract from the strength of a sign's visual image. A simple combination of black and /or white and a single well - chosen color is often the.most striking and effective. 2. Try to relate the general color effect of the sign to the building to which it belongs. 3. Choose a style of letter that is appropriate to the business and building (preferably no more than one style per sign). 4. Make sure that the letters are closely legible, whatever style is chosen, or they will not be doing their job. It should be emphasized that the greatest legibility is not necessarily the result of the largest size letters. 5. Choose the size of the letters carefully. Just as the sign should be in proportion to its building, the size of the letters should be in proportion —both to the sign and the building. A note on existing signs. (Excerpted from the Boston Sign Code) : , Appendix E / 109 If there is an old, existing sign on the building that is still appropriate to the business, make sure that it is not of historic interest or aesthetic merit before replacing it. Many signs dating from around the turn of the century still exist and, when restored, can contribute character and distinction to the business, building, and the street. " 07/06/98 MON 15:28 FAX 425 452 4570 PCD INSPECTIONS 22B.10.130 EXEMPT SIGNS OR DISPLAYS The following signs or displays are exempted from coverage under this code: A. Traffic or pedestrian control signs or signals, or signs indicating scenic or historic points of interest, which are erected by or on the order of a public officer in the performance of his public duty; • B. Signs required by law; C. Official public notices, 'official court notices or official sheriffs notices; D. The flag of a government or noncommercial institutions such as schools; E. Exterior signs or displays not visible from streets or ways open to the public; F. Signs in the interior of a building more than three feet from the closet window or not facing a window; G. • Plaques, tablets or inscriptions indicating the name of a building, its date of erection, or other commemorative information, which are an integral part of the building structure or are attached flat to the face of the building, which are nonilluminated, and which do not exceed three square feet in surface area; H. "No trespassing," "no dumping," "no parking," "private," and other informational warning signs, which shall not'exceed three square feet in surface area; I. Reasonable seasonal decorations within the appropriate public holiday season. However, such displays shall be removed within five days following the end of the public holiday season; J. The flag of a commercial institution, No more than one flag is permitted per business premises, the flag shall.not exceed 20 square feet in surface area, and shall be left loose to fly in the breeze; K. Sculptures, fountains, mosaics and design features which do not incorporate advertising or identification; L. Sandwich -board signs worn by a person while walking the public ways of the city; M. Existing theater marquees (freestanding and /or building - mounted); N. Reasonable temporary decorations and sign for the purpose of announcing or promoting a nonprofit sponsored community fair, festival or event. Such decorations and signs may be displayed no more than 14 calendar days prior to and during the fair, festival or event. Cify of BEllavE SgN CodE PAgE32 21002 �� 07/06/98 MON 15:28 FAX 425 452 4570 PCD INSPECTIONS If approved by the public works department such decorations or signs may be located on or over the public right -of -way. All decorations and signs must be removed within five calendar days following the end of the fair, festival or event. (Ord. 3525 § 1, 185; 1961 code § 17.01.100.) " Ciry ofBEUEYUE Sigv COdE PAgE33 el 003 z mow. re 2 J U U O' C 0 u)W W= H. W0 u. J Q. co w H O'. U • D' '0I— w W' Z W co O • z. 07/06/98 MON 15:28 FAX 425 452 4570 07/06/98 MON 15:29 FAX 425 452 4570 PCD INSPECTIONS f. The sign must not be an incidental sign; and g. Either: 005 (i) The sign was covered by a sign permit on the date of adoption of this code, if one was required under applicable law; or (ii) If no sign permit was required under applicable law for the sign in question, the sign was in all respects in compliance with applicable law on the date of adoption of this code. 3. Number of Nonconforming Signs Permitted. Each sign user having nonconforming signs meeting the requirements of paragraph (2) of subsection (B) .of this section shall be permitted to retain one (only) such sign along each street upon which the business premises fronts. A nonconforming sign permit must be obtained for each sign to be retained. 4. Permit for Nonconforming Signs. A nonconforming sign permit is required for each nonconforming sign designated under paragraph (3) of subsection (B) of this section. The permit shall be obtained by the sign user or the sign owner, or the owner of the property upon which the sign is located, within 60 days of notification by the city (under paragraph (1 ) of subsection (B) of this section) that the sign is nonconforming. The permit shall be issued for a fee and shall expire at the end of the applicable amortization period prescribed in paragraph (2) of subsection (D) of this section. Applications for a nonconforming sign permit shall contain the name and address of the sign user, the sign owner, and the owner of the property upon which the sign is located, and such other pertinent information as the Director may require to ensure compliance with the code, including proof of the date of installation of the sign. A nonconforming sign for which no permit has been issued within the 60 day period shall within six months be brought into compliance with the code or be removed. Failure to comply shall subject the sign user, sign owner or owner of the property on which the sign is located to the remedies and penalties of subsection (C) of this section. 5. Loss of Nonconforming Status. A nonconforming sign shall immediately lose its nonconforming designation if: a. The sign is altered in any way in structure or copy (except for changeable copy and normal maintenance described in subsection (E) of this section), which tends to or makes the sign Tess in compliance with the requirements of this code than it was before the alteration; or Ciry ofBElll uESigro Cock PACC4 5 07/06/98 MON 15:29 FAX 425 452 4570 PCD INSPECTIONS Z006 b. The sign is relocated to a position making it less in compliance with the requirements of this code; or c. The sign is replaced; or d. Any new primary sign is erected or placed in connection with the enterprise using the nonconforming sign; or e. No application for a nonconforming sign permit is filed by the sign user, sign owner, or owner of the property upon which the sign is located within 60 days following notification by the city (under paragraph (1) of subsection (A) of this section) that the sign is nonconforming and that a permit must be obtained. if a sign loses its nonconforming status pursuant to subparagraphs a, b, c, d, or e, any permit or designation for what had been designated as a nonconforming sign shall become void, the Director shall notify the sign user, sign owner or owner of the property upon which the sign is located of cancellation of the permit or designation, and the sign shall immediately be brought into compliance with this code and a new permit secured therefor, or shall be removed. C. illegal Signs. Any illegal sign is any sign which does not comply with the requirements of this code within the city limits as they now or hereafter exist, and which is not eligible for a nonconforming sign permit under BCC 22B.10.200.B.2 may be immediately removed by the city if the sign is located on city property or right -of -way. The city may remove an illegal sign located on private property no less than 10 days following the mailing of notice to the property owner or person in charge of the premises that the sign is illegal and must be removed. D. Amortization Period for Nonconforming Signs. Nonconforming signs for which a nonconforming sign permit has been issued may remain in a nonconforming state for nine years after the date of installation of the sign, or six years after notification by the city of the sign's nonconformity, .whichever is longer. Thereafter, subject to subsection (F) of this section, the sign shall be brought into conformity with this code with a permit obtained therefor, or be removed; provided, however, that the amortization period established by this section may be used only so long as the sign retains its nonconforming status (see BCC 22B.10.200.B.5); and, provided further that upon any change in land use or occupancy, or change in business name, such nonconforming signs shall, within six months, be brought into conformity with this code with a permit obtained therefor, or be removed. The authorization provision of this code shall not apply to signs, the advertising or informative content of which are oriented toward and visible from the main traveled portion of the interstate system or other state highway. Chy(-t' ".ESIQNCo? PACF4/ 07/06/98 MON 15:30 FAX 425 452 4570 PCD INSPECTIONS Z007 E. Nonconforming Sign Maintenance and Repair. Nothing in this section shall relieve the owner or user of a nonconforming sign or owner of the property on which the nonconforming sign is located from the provisions of this code regarding safety, maintenance and repair of signs, contained in BCC 226.10.140, and from the provisions on prohibited signs, contained in BCC 228.10.150; provided, however, that any repainting, cleaning, and other normal maintenance or repair of the sign or sign structure shall not modify the sign structure or copy in any way w which makes it less in compliance with the requirements of this code, or the sign will lose its nonconforming status. (See paragraph (5) of subsection (B) of this -J o section.) o J F. Sign Amortization Exemption Process. u, w w0 1. Applicability. This subsection (F) applies to each sign which is required to be removed pursuant to subsection (D) of this section following the amortization period. w �-_ 2. Purpose. A sign amortization exemption is a mechanism by which the city o may provide relief from the effect of the sign amortization program when its w w enforcement would fail to noticeably improve the appearance of the neighborhood and the city. o o �- 3. Who May Apply. The property owner or the person displaying the sign o which is required to be removed pursuant to subsection D of this section u. o may apply for a sign amortization exemption. ui z 4. Special Filing Requirement. The' applicant must submit a completed o application for a sign amortization exemption by June 22, 1 987, or is thereafter barred from making such application. If a completed application is not filed, the sign is illegal and in violation of this code. 5. Applicable Procedure. The city will process an application for a sign amortization exemption through Process II, Bellevue City Code (Land Use Code) Section 20.35.200 et seq. 6. Submittal Requirements. a. The Director shall specify the submittal requirements, including type, detail and number of copies, for a sign amortization exemption application to be deemed complete and accepted for filing. b. The Director may waive specific submittal requirements determined to be unnecessary for review of an application. 7. Decision Criteria. The Director may approve or approve with modifications an application for a sign amortization exemption if: Ciryof Beam *Iv Code PAge47 � 1 ._07/06/98 MON 15:30 FAX 425 452 4570 PCD INSPECTIONS la 008 a. The sign is compatible with the architectural design of structures on the subject property; and b. The sign substantially complies with the requirements of the sign code for the land use district in which it is located, and c. The sign complies with Bellevue City Code (Land Use Code) Section 20.20.830 (Street intersection sight obstruction), and d. If illuminated, the sign is oriented away from residentially developed or zoned property or is adequately screened so that the source of light is not directly visible. Effect of Exemption. If the Director approves or approves with modification a sign amortization exemption, that sign may remain until removal is required pursuant to subsections (B)(5) or (C) of this section. 9. Assurance Device. The Director may,require a reasonable performance or maintenance assurance device in conformance with Bellevue City Code (Land Use Code) Section 20.40.490 to assure compliance with the provisions of the sign code and exemption as approved. 10. Fee. The applicant shall pay a fee upon application which is equal to that land use review and processing fee required for a variance to the sign code. , ; CfFY ofBEIIEVue SIGN COdE PAgE48 07!06/1998 11:11 379 -6923 CITY OF PT BCD City of Port Townsend PAGE 01 Design Guidelines for Murals in the Special Overlay Design Review District and National Landmark Historic District ~ w 0 Purpose 0 o co w� These Design Guidelines are established for the following purposes: - w w0 1. To supplement land use regulations which encourage. and promote public health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Port Townsend. c a =o 2. To provide guidance to urban design decisions that will promote development of high Z w environmental and visual quality throughout the City. o o w~ 3. To assist applicants in the preparation of development applications. w D � 4. To assist decision- making by the Historic Preservation Commission in the review of o 1— development applications. w • w Io ..z w co O ~ The design guidelines for murals in the commercial areas of the Port Townsend National z Historic District and the Special Overlay Design Review District are intended to be used as an aid to appropriate design and not as a checklist for compliance. The purpose of the guidelines is to create awareness of the unique character of the District during the design of murals. These guidelines identify the design elements deemed important in reviewing murals for appropriateness and are the basis for decisions made by the Historic Preservation Commission. Introductip Definitions For the purpose of these guidelines, the following definitions shall apply: Mural Signs are wall signs containing advertising which consist exclusively of paint applied to the wall of a building without application of any other material or framing. The Port Townsend Municipal Code, Chapter 17.50 defines advertising as: Post -It• Fax Note 7671 To coroe41yl�s ate F#uc 4 ,264 -4/3( -346 Phone # pta n Oere 71(x[ 9 D [Peggy] From co. ' Phone a Foxe �LO- 1-69a3 (Rev. 1/28/93) 07/06/1998 11:11 379 -6923 Historic Preservation Commission Mural Guidelines, Draft 5 Page 2 CITY OF PT BCD Any display of letters, numerals, characters, words, symbols, emblems, illustrations, objects or registered trademarks which serve to call to the attention of the public to products, services, businesses, buildings, premises, events, candidates or ballot propositions. z �w cc 2 JU U 0 CO W= 1- Artistic Murals consist exclusively of paint applied to the wall of a building without application n w of any other material or framing, and which contain no advertising. w o gQ co a =w z�. I- 0' z I- w w U O O - O I-- w W IO .z: Lb U= H1- New mural signs on surfaces other than those identified above in Item A shall meet the following z criteria: Guidelines I. Mural Sign Guidelines A. New Mural Signs .on Unpainted Surfaces: No new mural signs shall be permitted on unpainted brick, unpainted and painted stone, wood sidings with surface detail (i.e., bevel siding or board and batten siding, etc.) or any other material which does not have a flat planar character. B. New Mural Signs on Other Surfaces: 1. Mural signs shall be designed to complement the architectural and historic character of the Historic District. 2. Mural signs shall not interrupt, detract, or overwhelm the historic architectural features of the building. Rather, they shall comply with the guidelines below: a. Mural signs shall be located only on planar or flat surfaces of buildings and shall not overlap architectural features such as cornices, beams, columns, trim, windows, doors, vents, control joints in plaster, etc. b. Mural signs shall reinforce the size, shape and proportions of building features such as column bays, window proportions and placement, planar wall proportions, etc. (Rev. 1/28/93) 67/66/1998 11:11 379 -6923 Historic Preservation Commission Mural Guidelines, Draft 5 Page 3 CITY OF PT BCD z c. Mural signs shall be placed within column bays. windows, planar walls, _ I etc. so as to have a minimum border separation of 25% of the shortest w ILI mural dimension from architectural features. QQ JU 00 d. Mural signs shall be laid out parallel and orthagonal (at a right angle) to cn a the buildings architectural elements such as columns, beams, trim, W i cornices, parapets. etc. co u. u o 2 e. Mural signs shall be laid out or composed within the building's gn. 5 architectural framework to reinforce a sense of balance of the overall u. a mural /architectural composition. = d I- w Z= 3. Mural signs shall not be located on the primary street facade of buildings. 1.- 1—o zr-- LU a. For buildings located on corners, murals shall not be located on the w primary street facade but may be located on the secondary street facade 0 N in provided the murals conform with the other requirements of these o i--. guidelines. _ 0 ~ t= 4. Mural signs shall not exceed 60 square feet in area. Exception: Where large � o z expansive planar walls over 2000 square feet in uninterrupted area occur, larger o murals may be permitted provided they meet other mural sign guidelines and o Y provided that the murals do not overwhelm the size, scale, design and historic z integrity of the building as determined by the Historic Preservation Commission. 5. Murals signs shall be located, designed, and proportioned to reinforce the building facade proportions and to reinforce the vertical nature of the district. 6. Colors shall be drawn from the Port Townsend National Landmark Historic District Approved Color Palette; other colors must be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. 7. Applicants shall demonstrate that preparation, priming and finish painting materials shall not darnage the surface of the building and that the finished • application shall not lead to the surface deteriorating in an accelerated fashion over time. 8. New mural signs shall not be painted over "Historic" murals. 07/06/1998 11:11 379 - 6923,., Historic Preservation Commission Mural Guidelines, Draft 5 Page 4 CITY OF PT BCD 9. New mural signs shall protect the historical significance of the district by making a visual distinction between old and new murals; new murals shall reflect the late 19th century period without imitating it and applying the following: a. Since the historic murals primarily emphasized lettering with simple trademarks, new murals shall be simple in nature and direct in approach with a complimentary emphasis on lettering and simple trademarks without copying historic images. b, New murals shall have simple, rectangular fields which contain all lettering, trademarks, and imagery. Borders or implied borders are suggested to reinforce the containment of images within the mural and minimize the impact on the architectural character of the building. C. Repainting Existing Recent Murals 1. Recent murals are those believed to have been painted within the last 50 years and are in existence on December 31, 1992. Recent murals include, but are not limited to: a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. Tree of Heaven, Mount Baker Block Children's Mural, Police Station Lazzie's, Hastings Building Holly's Flowers, McCurdy Building Port Townsend Athletic Club, 229 Monroe Mary Kaiser Design , 807 Washington Abundant Life Seed Foundation, 1029 Lawrence The Gym, 1530 Franklin Cinammon's Apparel, 1005 Water (Artistic Mural) (Artistic Mural) (Mural Sign) (Mural Sign) (Mural Sign) (Artistic Mural) (Mural Sign) (Mural Sign) (Mural Sign) 2. Existing recent mural signs may be repainted with Historic Preservation Commission review if the applicant can show that repainting would not likely accelerate deterioration of the brick. D. Abandoned Mural Signs 1. Recent and new mural signs which become abandoned shall be allowed to remain until such time as a new mural is approved for the site. (Ray. 1/28/93) / . 87/66/1998 11:11 379 -6923 Historic Preservation Commission Mural Guidelines, Draft 5 Page 5 E. Historic Murals CITY OF PT BCD to5 1. No existing murals other than those listed under paragraph C(1), above, may be repainted, painted out, removed or otherwise disturbed or altered, except where structural integrity of the building is at stake. 2. Historic Preservation Commission review of the the restoration of historic murals is postponed until after August 1, 1993, as the Commission continues to research the subject. ,. 3. If the building is repointed, it must be done in a way which follows the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings. After repointing, new grout should be painted to match the color and surface quality of the existing sign. 4. Prior to tuckpointing, photographic documentation of the historic signs shall be undertaken. Photographs shall be taken by a professional photographer using a large format camera (not 35 mm) at as near straight -on view as possible. The photographs (at least four 8 by 8 inch color prints) shall be provided to the Historic Preservation Commission. 5. Historic photographic documentation of the signs (if any) shall also be collected and chronicled and made available to the Historic Preservation Commission upon request. II. Artistic Murals Further discussion of artistic mural guidelines is postponed until after April, 1993, so the Historic Preservation Commission may further research the subject. • Adopted this 26th day of Tanuary, 1993 Mike Ya man, Chair Histdnc P servation Commission (Rev. 1/28/93) � .67/66/1998 11 :11 379 - 6923. CITY OF PT BCD H. Traffic, directional or informational signs lawfully installed, or required to be installed, by a government entity; provided that, in the event of any conflict between the provisions of this chapter and the provisions of any applicable state law, the provisions of this chapter shall govern unless expressly preempted by the Laws of the state; I. Signs not intended to be viewed from, and which are not readable from, a public right -of -way; J. Window merchandise display; K. Flags of the United States, the state, the city, the county, foreign nations, and any other flag adopted or sanctioned by an elected legislative body of competent jurisdiction; provided, that such a flag shall not exceed 60 square feet in sign area and shall not be flown from a pole the top of which is more than 40 feet in height. Such flags must be flown in accordance with protocol established by the Congress of the United States for the Stars and Stripes. Any flag not meeting any one or more of these conditions shall be considered a banner sign and be subject to regulation as such; L. Decorative banners if no more than five per each premises; M. Legal notices required by law; N. Barber poles; O. Grave markers; P. Incidental, nonilluminated signs identifying small specialized community service structures, such as phone booths, public transit shelters, and collection containers for used goods or recyclable materials; Q. Incidental, nonilluminated signs limited to three per storefront; R. Nonilluminated informational signs pertaining to motor fuel which are affixed to the surface of fuel pumps, but not including signs projecting from the sides or top of such pumps; S. Temporary signs limited to a 15 -day display; T. Lettering or symbols painted directly onto or mounted magnetically onto an operable motor vehicle operating in the normal course of business; provided no part of such signs shall project higher than the roof surface of any such vehicle other than franchised buses or taxis; U. Signs attached to franchised buses or taxis; V. One nonilluminated bulletin board not larger than 12 square feet in area for each public, charitable or religious institution when the same is erected on the premises of the tion, Mural signs within the national historic district in existence on the effective date of the o mance codified in this chapter; X. Nonilluminated religious symbols mounted on church premises. 17.76.080 Special exemption - Grand opening signs. A. During a grand opening not to exceed 10 days, temporary signs may be displayed on the premises without a sign permit and regulations with respect to sign area, roof placement, sign height and type of signs are temporarily suspended. B. All other regulations provided herein and not expressly suspended by this section shall apply to grand opening signs. City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director TO: Planning Commission FROM: Steve Lancaster DATE: June 19, 1998 u..)v RE: Issues Regarding Sign Amortization Program for Discussion at June 25th Work Session New Sign Amortization Concept During its May 28th work session, the Commission asked staff to continue working on a sign amortization concept and to draft initial ordinance language. The documents enclosed in your packet build upon your discussions during the April 23rd and May 28th work sessions as well as staff meetings with Bill Arthur and staff conversations with Vern Meryhew. Staff has also briefed Pam Hawley (the property owner of Epiros, Trudy's and Riverton Pharmacy) on the results of the case study we conducted. The sign amortization documents are as follows: 1. Draft Ordinance Language: This document amends and attempts to clarify the definitions of the words premises, off - premises, and on- premises. It also provides suggested revisions to Tukwila's existing sign code text as well as draft amendments describing the sign amortization program. 2. Examples A through D: These examples apply the program formula to four different, but typical, scenarios. 3. Case Study: Two scenarios are provided using and owned by Hawley Enterprises 4. Sample Timeline: This timeline illustrates the phasing of the program using a starting date of December 31, 1998. Next Step Depending on how much progress is made during the June 25th work session, the Commission may wish to determine the direction it will take concerning community outreach and a public hearing. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 4313670 • Fax (206) 431 -3665 z ~w 2 0 0O cn 0. WI W • o ga =• d I- al Z= 0 z w w 0 0- 0 F- W 1- ir- u_ z ui 0 z STAGED COMPLIANCE SIGN AMORTIZATION ORDINANCE DEFINITIONS Off - Premises Sign• Any sign whichis not on the same premises as the business with which it is identified or which cannot be classified as an on- premises sign under TMC 18.08.140 On- Premises Sign: A sign which displays advertising copy specifically related to the primary use of the premises on which it is located, including signs or sign devices indicating the business transacted at, services rendered, goods sold or produced on the immediate premises, name of the business, person, firm or corporation occupying the premises, including signs with adjustable copy known as readerboards Said sign mustbe on the same premises as the business with which it is identified. Premises• A physically separate and distinct parcel of proper also known as a "Lot" as it is defined in TMC 18.06.500), The existing definitions in the sign code require more specific language, especially as they pertain to off - premises issues REVISIONS TO EXISTING SIGN CODE TEXT Modify TMC 19.12.050(2): 2. Repainting or cleaning of an advertising structure shall not be considered an erection or alteration which requires a sign permit unless: a. a structural or electrical change is made; or b. the area or the shape of the sign is altered „sr c. except as provided by subsection (1) above, there is a change in the Modify TMC 19.28.030 6/18/98 DRAFT ions of the sign ordinance in effect -at the time of erection, or which has t from the City may remain in use until such time as: 1. There is a change that the cign identifies nr . permit from the City; Repeal TMC 19.28.040 Staff recommends deletion of the entire section to simplify the amortization process and reduce confusion. The amortization tools provided in the section would no longer be needed if full compliance is achieved over time (via the Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Ordinance). have 30 days f n the date -of closure to remove all sighs relating to the bus+aess or activity. If femov This provision has not been aggressively enforced in the past. As it is currently written, it would also require the removal of conforming signs. This amortization tool would no longer be needed if full compliance is achieved over time (via the Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Ordinance). AMENDMENTS TO EXISTING SIGN CODE TEXT Chapter 19.29 Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program 19.29.010 General The Staged Compliance Sign Amortization Program is a phased program designed to bring all signage in the City of Tukwila into conformance within a defined • time period. The ordinance was adopted on [December 31. 1998]. All decisions regarding the Staged Sign Amortization Program are Type 2 decisions under TMC 18.104.010(C) and may be appealed to the Hearing Examiner under TMC Chapter 18.116. 19.29.020 Removal - Non - Conforming Off - Premises Signs All non - conforming signs which are off - premises at the time of the adoption of the Staged Compliance •rd' - e m b- r-moved .r br.u•h i . om.li nce wi i Tu ila's i• code - ndards within eighteen months after the date of the adoption of the ordinance. This length of time, known as the Compliance Period for Non - Conforming Off- Premises Signs expires on [June 30. 2000]. 6/18/98 DRAFT 2 z H w 6 JU U O. CD 0 (n W W= F- 2 WO 2 u.Q =• a F. 1W Z I- 0 zt- W w U� O - � H WW • O .. z W • = O ▪ H z 19.29.030 Removal - Non - Conforming On- Premises Signs II n. - . orui • i• whic - e on -.r- ises a he - of h- ado. an • t e Sta•ed Com.liance Ordinance must be removed or brought into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards within the three year Base Amortization Period. The Base Amortization Period begins on [January 1, 1999] and expires on [December 31. 20011, Businesses entering into a Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement ( "VSR ") will be allowed additional time beyond the Base Amortization Period. The VSR Agreement is an agreement between a land owner and the City of Tukwila regarding non- • f•rmi • • -•r mi es s'•na• T is a•reem -n allow an ex n.ed 'me • -ri•d of a s ifi -d len h o either remove this signage or bring it into compliance with Tukwila's sign code standards. The Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement allows land owners and their tenants to tailor a compliance program to meet long- term needs while implementing an initial, immediate reduction in non - conforming signage. If they decline to participate, the Base Amortization Period allows a three year period for compliance. This will result in some significant reductions in non - conforming signage by the end of the Base Amortization Period. 19.29.040 Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreements Any non- conforming on- premises sign covered by a VSR Agreement will be allowed an Extended Compliance Period beyond the three year Base Amortization Period. Applications are available from the Department of Community Development and will be processed free of charge. The application deadline will be established by staff. The approval and execution of all VSR's will occur no later than [June 30 2000], The implementation deadline for all approved and executed VSR's is [December 31 2001], The terms and expiration date of each Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement must be tracked by staff to insure compliance. Reminder and follow -up letters are part of this process. 19.29.050 Extended Compliance Periods Under Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement The extended Compliance Period for non- conforming on- premises signs covered by a Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement is determined using the Percent of Reduction formula. This formula reflects the reduction in non - conforming signage on a premises (expressed as a percentage) at the time of execution of the Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement. It is used on a per premises basis to determine the Extended Compliance Period for non - conforming on- premises signs. The reduction in the total square footage of all non - conforming signage to be reduced is divided by the total square footage of all non- conforming signage. A 15% bonus is added to the resulting percentage for each non - conforminq freestanding sign (if any) which has been removed or brought into compliance, Total non - conforming Percent of Reduction equals A 15% bonus for each square f.o a•e reduced per the VSR Agreement Total non - conforming square footage before reduction n•n- conformi • freestanding sign removed or made conforming (if applicable) under the terms of the VSR Th- P -r -n .f Red c ure i -n - ..li -d li.in• s -le which es ablish- he dura ion of he extended Compliance Period. as follows, 6/18/98 DRAFT 3 Establishing the Extended Compliance Period Percent of Reduction Duration of Extended Using Formula Compliance Period Less than 30% at least 30% but not more than 45% at least 45% but_not more than 60% at Least 6Q% and higher Not eligible for Extended Compliance Period 4.5 years (Base Amortization + 1.5 years) 6 years (Base Amortization + 3 years) 7.5 years (Base Amortization + 4 5 years) Examples A through D (attached) illustrate the application of this formula to various typical scenarios. The Planning Commission may wish to consider a provision for marginal non - conformity, thereby permitting applicable signs to remain "as is ". 19.29.060 Failure to Comply All non - conforming and illegal signs must be brought into conformance within the applicable Compliance Period or must be removed within 14 days from the expiration of that Compliance Period. Any sign which remains illeg ?l or non - conforming beyond this date will be subject to penalties under TMC 1 08.010 The Planning Commission may wish to consider certain types of administrative waivers or exemptions based on financial hardship of a land owner or historic value of a particular sign. 19.29.070 Maintenance and Repair Nothing in this Chapter shall relieve the owner or user of a non - conforming sign from the provisions of this code regarding safety. maintenance and repair of signage. 6/18/98 DRAFT 4 z O 0 co O W = F- � W; wO. g I F- W Z= F- 0 Z w CO U• O O— O I -, W w, u. ~O. .z'. F-• = O F-: z Staged Compliance Sign Program Percent of Reduction Example A Property owner reduces size of Wall Sign #2 by 92 s.f. and removes Wall Signs # 3, #4, and #5, qualifying for a 60% Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement - Sign Type Total Square Feet Total Allowed Square Feet Total Non- Conforming Square Feet Wall Sign #1 200 108 92 WaII Sign #2 200 108 92 WaII Sign #3 100 0 100 Wall Sign #4 50 0 50 Wall Sign #5 50 0 50 Totals 600 216 384 FORMULA: Total non- conforming Percent of Reduction = 15% bonus for each square footage reduced + non - conforming Total non - conforming square footage before reduction freestanding sign removed or made conforming (if applicable) TOTAL NON- CONFORMING SQUARE FOOTAGE REDUCED TOTAL NON- CONFORMING SQUARE FOOTAGE BEFORE REDUCTION REDUCTION IN TOTAL NON - CONFORMING SQUARE FOOTAGE (PERCENTAGE) 292 384 76% TOTAL NUMBER OF NON - CONFORMING FREESTANDING SIGNS REMOVED OR MADE CONFORMING 15% BONUS FOR EACH NON- CONFORMING FREESTANDING SIGN REMOVED OR MADE CONFORMING PERCENTAGE APPLIED TO VOLUNTARY SIGN REDUCTION AGREEMENT 0 N/A 76% AMORTCAL.XLS 6/18/98 DRAFT AMORTCAL.XLS 6/18/98 DRAFT Staged Compliance Sign Program_ Percent of Reduction Example B Property owner removes Freestanding Sign #2, qualifying for a 30% Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement Sign Type - Total Square Feet Total Allowed Square Feet Total Non - Conforming Square Feet Wall Sign #1 300 150 150 Wail Sign #2 100 0 100 Wall Sign #3 100 0 100 Freestanding #1 350 150 200 Freestanding #2 200 0 200 Totals _ 1050 300 750 FORMULA: Total non - conforming Percent of Reduction = 15% bonus for each square footage reduced + non- conforming Total non - conforming square footage before reduction freestanding sign removed or made conforming (if applicable) TOTAL NON- CONFORMING SQUARE FOOTAGE REDUCED TOTAL NON- CONFORMING SQUARE FOOTAGE BEFORE REDUCTION REDUCTION IN TOTAL NON - CONFORMING SQUARE FOOTAGE (PERCENTAGE) 200 750 27% TOTAL NUMBER OF NON - CONFORMING FREESTANDING SIGNS REMOVED OR MADE CONFORMING 15% BONUS FOR EACH NON- CONFORMING FREESTANDING SIGN REMOVED OR MADE CONFORMING PERCENTAGE APPLIED TO VOLUNTARY SIGN REDUCTION AGREEMENT 1 15% 42% . z w 6U 00 Cl W= J i —'. WO 2 ?. co =W Z� I— 0 Z I— W U O co, UL 0 1- W W. pc-5 Wz U U. N O Z AMORTCAL.XLS 6/18/98 DRAFT . Staged Compliance Sign Program Percent of Reduction Example D Property owner removes Freestanding Signs #1 and #2. This qualifies for a 60% Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement Sign Type - Total Square Feet Total Allowed Square Feet Total Non - Conforming Square Feet Wall Sign #1 200 35 165 Freestanding #1 100 0 100 Freestanding #2 75 0 75 Freestanding #3 150 100 50 Totals 525 135 390 FORMULA: Total non - conforming Percent of Reduction = 15% bonus for each square footage reduced + •non- conforming freestanding sign removed or made conforming (if applicable) Total non - conforming square footage before reduction TOTAL NON- CONFORMING SQUARE FOOTAGE REDUCED TOTAL NON- CONFORMING SQUARE FOOTAGE BEFORE REDUCTION REDUCTION IN TOTAL NON - CONFORMING SQUARE FOOTAGE (PERCENTAGE) 175 390 45% TOTAL NUMBER OF NON - CONFORMING FREESTANDING SIGNS REMOVED OR MADE CONFORMING 15% BONUS FOR EACH NON- CONFORMING FREESTANDING SIGN REMOVED OR MADE CONFORMING PERCENTAGE APPLIED TO VOLUNTARY SIGN REDUCTION AGREEMENT 2 30% 75% AMORTCAL.XLS 6/18/98 DRAFT z w W0: O 0. co 0 w= J I— w w 2 LI- 4 = Ci Z� O Z W • W U 0 O N 0 I- Ww 0 lL 0 — O. W z = O~ Z S 150 St S 152 St HAWLEY ENTERPRISES CASE STUDY CONSOLIDATION INTO ONE LOT North AR1 44414 /t4rAvwe=44 " q,s,:or,cnttirkv=oriVe,,,AVAIIA'MTMItrIr - AMORTCAL.XLS 6/18/98 DRAFT Staged Compliance Sign Program Percent of Reduction Hawley Enterprises Case Study Consolidation into One Lot Property owner removes one illegal (150 s.f.) wall sign (Riverton) plus 2 freestanding signs (Flower Drum Freestanding #1 and Trudy's Freestanding #2) qualifying for a 45% Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement. Combined 415' street frontage and two buildings allows 2 freestanding signs with 200 square feet area for each sign. Sign Type Riverton Roof #1 Estimated Total Square Feet Total Allowed Square Feet Total Non - Conforming Square Feet Riverton Roof #2 120 0 120 Flwer Drum Free #1 25 0 25 Fiwer Drum Free #2 Trudy's Free #1 48 0 48 272 200 72 Trudy's Free #2 Totals 288 200 88 72 825 0 400 72 425 FORMULA: Total non - conforming square footage reduced Total non - conforming square footage before reduction Percent of Reduction = 15% bonus for each non - conforming freestanding sign removed or made conforming (if applicable) TOTAL NON- CONFORMING SQUARE FOOTAGE REDUCED TOTAL NON- CONFORMING SQUARE FOOTAGE BEFORE REDUCTION 120 425 REDUCTION IN TOTAL NON- CONFORMING SQUARE FOOTAGE (PERCENTAGE) 28% TOTAL NUMBER OF NON - CONFORMING FREESTANDING SIGNS REMOVED OR MADE CONFORMING 15% BONUS FOR EACH NON- CONFORMING FREESTANDING SIGN REMOVED OR MADE CONFORMING PERCENTAGE APPLIED TO VOLUNTARY SIGN REDUCTION AGREEMENT 2 30% 58% ; I I I S 152 St z Z w • 2 0 O 0 CO CO LU WI u j 0 • < 1111 z I-0 z uj • 0 0 O (.12 o W• W - r• 6 z • u) P O I- Staged Compliance Sign Program Percent of Reduction Hawley Enterprises Case Study Boundary Line Adjustment with Lot Consolidation (Riverton and Epiros on same premises) Property owner removes one illegal (150 s.f.) wall sign (Riverton), and two freestanding signs (Flower Drum Freestanding #1 and Trudy's Freestanding #2) qualifying for a 60% Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement. Riverton and Epiros may share Rower Drum Freestanding Sign #2 but maximum size cannot be over 75 s.f. per face (or 150 s.f. total) based on 288 linear feet of street frontage. Sign Type Estimated Total Square Feet Total Allowed Square Feet Total Non - Conforming Square Feet Riverton Roof #1 120 0 120 Riverton Roof #2 25 0 25 Flwr Drum Free #1 48 0 48 Flwer Drum Free #2 272 150 122 Trudy's Free #2 72 0 72 Totals 537 150 387 FORMULA: Percent of Reduction = Total non - conforming 15% bonus for each square footage reduced + non - conforming Total non - conforming square footage before reduction freestanding sign removed or made conforming (if applicable) TOTAL NON- CONFORMING SQUARE FOOTAGE REDUCED TOTAL NON- CONFORMING SQUARE FOOTAGE BEFORE REDUCTION REDUCTION IN TOTAL NON - CONFORMING SQUARE FOOTAGE (PERCENTAGE) 120 387 31% TOTAL NUMBER OF NON- CONFORMING FREESTANDING SIGNS REMOVED OR MADE CONFORMING 15% BONUS FOR EACH NON- CONFORMING FREESTANDING SIGN REMOVED OR MADE CONFORMING PERCENTAGE APPLIED TO VOLUNTARY SIGN REDUCTION AGREEMENT 2 30% 61% AMORTCAL.XLS 6/18/98 DRAFT AMORTCAL.XLS 6/18/98 DRAFT Staged Compliance Sign Program Percent of Reduction Hawley Enterprises Case Study Boundary Line Adjustment with Lot Consolidation (Trudy's on separate premises) Property owner reduces size of Trudy's Freestanding #1 by 188 s.f. This qualifies for a 60% Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement. Maximum size of sign is 50 s.f. per face (100 s.f. total) based on 127 feet of linear street frontage. Sign Type Estimated Total Square Feet Total Allowed Square Feet Total Non - Conforming Square Feet Trudy's Free #1 288 100 188 Totals 288 100 188 FORMULA: Total non - conforming square footage reduced Total non - conforming square footage before reduction Percent of Reduction = 15% bonus for each non - conforming freestanding sign removed or made conforming (if applicable) TOTAL NON- CONFORMING SQUARE FOOTAGE REDUCED TOTAL NON- CONFORMING SQUARE FOOTAGE BEFORE REDUCTION REDUCTION IN TOTAL NON - CONFORMING SQUARE FOOTAGE (PERCENTAGE) 188 188 100% TOTAL NUMBER OF NON- CONFORMING FREESTANDING SIGNS REMOVED OR MADE CONFORMING 15% BONUS FOR EACH NON- CONFORMING FREESTANDING SIGN REMOVED OR MADE CONFORMING PERCENTAGE APPLIED TO VOLUNTARY SIGN REDUCTION AGREEMENT 1 15% . 115% YEARS: End of amortization period Aggressive action for non -conforming on illegal signs off -premises signs 6/30/99 6/30/00 STAGED COMPLIANCE SIGN AMORTIZATION ORDINANCE SAMPLE TIMELINE Full compliance date for properties not subject to VSR's (end of Base Full Compliance Date Full Compliance Date Amortization Period) for 30% VSR's for 45% VSR's 12/31/01 i 6/30/03 12/31/04 Full Compliance Date for 60% VSR's 6/30/06 0 0.5 1.5 3.0 "Staged Compliance" Last date for Deadline for Ordinance Adopted approval & implementation 12/31/98 execution of of VSR's VSR's 12/31/01 6/30/00 6/18/98 DRAFT 4.5 NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. 6.0 7.5 FULL COMPLIANCE WITH TUKWILA SIGN CODE • City of Tukwila la John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Prepared May 22, 1998 At its April 23, 1998 meeting the Planning Commission reviewed several options for modifying how nonconforming signs are regulated. The Commission seemed to favor an approach to nonconforming signs that would result in the amortization of nonconforming signs over time, while providing increased flexibility in the use and re -use of such signs in the interim. Staff was asked to work with Commission Members Arthur and Meryhew on a proposal for presentation to the Commission. The following provides a detailed description of a proposed approach to nonconforming sign reduction that combines: • incentives for early action on the part of business and property owners; • flexibility for continued use and re -use of nonconforming signs during the amortization period; and • a defined period within which all signage would be brought into conformance. "STAGED COMPLIANCE" SIGN PROGRAM The "Staged Compliance" sign reduction program would work as follows (please refer to Sample Timeline, attached): Illegal signs. An aggressive program of enforcement action against illegal signs would be instituted, similar to the junk vehicles enforcement program undertaken a few years ago. Property owners would be notified they have six months to remove such signs prior to aggressive enforcement action being taken. Nonconforming signs (off - premises). An amortization period of eighteen months would be established for all off - premises nonconforming signs. (Note: This will require that we develop a clearer definition of "on- premises" and "off- premises. ") Staff will provide the Commission with sample definitions at the May 28th work session. Nonconforming signs (on- premises). A base amortization period of 3 years for on- premises nonconforming signs would be established. 5/22/98 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431 -3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Individual property owners (working in cooperation with their commercial tenants, if any) could extend their compliance period from 3 years to 4.5, 6.0, or even 7.5 years by entering into a "Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement" with the City. Under this agreement, the owner and businesses would agree to reduce their level of sign nonconformity by 30 %, 45% or 60 %, respectively, in order to qualify for the extended compliance period. The Voluntary Agreement would have to be finalized within 1.5 years of adoption of the Staged Compliance program, and would have to be implemented by the property owner /affected businesses within 3 years of the program's adoption. Additional details: • Measurement of the reduction in nonconformity (30 %, 45% or 60 %) would be through a formula that takes into consideration both the square footage of all nonconforming signs, and the number of nonconforming freestanding signs. In measuring a reduction, square footage would be weighted by 2/3, and number of freestanding signs would be weighted 1/3. The formula is as follows: ( Total non - conforming Square footage reduced X 0.667 Total non - conforming square footage before reduction Total number of non - conforming freestanding signs + removed X 0.333 = Percent of Reduction Total number of non - conforming freestanding signs before reduction • Please see the chart on the attached sheet for an example of how this formula works. • Some Voluntary Agreements may involve both the elimination of existing nonconforming signage, and the installation of new conforming signage. (For example, a property owner may wish to substitute a new conforming sign for an existing non - conforming sign.) This substitution would be allowable, as long as the net reduction in nonconforming signage meets the 30 %, 45% or 60% target. • We would want to provide for some flexibility in the determination of what signs are non- conforming. For example, if a given sign exceeds the allowable square footage or height restriction by 5% or even 10 %, perhaps it should be considered to be "conforming." This would allow a sign that is marginally non - conforming to remain "as is ". • We may also want to provide some flexibility in achieving the target reduction percentages. For example, if a property owner comes up with a reasonable plan that results in a 29% reduction, and there is no reasonable way to get to 30 %, a minor administrative waiver should be available. • The Director of Community Development would be authorized to approve the Voluntary Agreements, including minor waivers as noted above.. However, there should be some appeal available, perhaps to the Hearing Examiner, if an individual party feels approval is being unreasonably withheld. 5/22/98 Page 2 Related Code Changes Two companion code revisions would be needed to make this program work in the desired manner. 1. Repeal the prohibition against re- facing existing nonconforming signs. This amortization tool will no longer be needed if we adopt a sign reduction program that will result in full compliance over time. Furthermore, providing for increased flexibility in the use and re -use of existing nonconforming signs during the amortization period will help property owners put together Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreements that meet their needs. 2. Repeal the requirement to remove signs related to a business, if the business closes. This provision has not been aggressively enforced in the past. Furthermore, aggressive enforcement could lead to an appearance of vacancy and decline for the area. The one area where we might want to keep the requirement to remove signage, is where the vacated business is not a permitted or conditionally permitted use. STAFF COMMENTS The program outlined above has the following advantages: • It would tackle the "illegal" sign problem almost immediately. • It would provide flexibility by allowing property owners and businesses to tailor their own phased -in sign amortization program over a period of up -to 7.5 years. This may help significantly in obtaining community support for the program. • It would result in some significant sign reduction in 3 years, and possibly additional reductions at 4.5 and 6 years. Total conformity would be reached in 7.5 years. The proposed program would have the following disadvantages: • It is somewhat complex and may be difficult to explain to the affected public. • Implementation and enforcement will consume a significant amount of staff time, requiring additional staff or a re- ordering of priorities. While this would be the case with any amortization program, this need is heightened by the complexity and flexibility of this proposal. • As with any amortization program, modification of basic sign standards before completion of the amortization period, would be difficult. 5/22/98 ';v az�cFli� Page 3 Despite the difficulties any sign amortization program will involve, staff believes that reduction of nonconforming signage is critically important to the revitalization and long term economic health of Pacific Highway. Please be advised that these materials have not been reviewed by the City Attorney. If the Commission wishes staff to further refine the concept, we will obtain a legal review and begin to convert the concept into ordinance language. NEXT STEPS There are two tasks before the Commission: 1. If the Commission wishes to continue its review and discussion of the proposed Staged Compliance Sign Program, we have reserved Council Chambers for the evening of Thursday, June 1 lth. Alternatively, if the Commission is satisfied with the direction of the proposal, staff can obtain a legal review and draft initial ordinance language in anticipation of a June 25th work session. 2. Due to time constraints, the Commission was not able to provide staff direction on the requested amendments to the sign code presented by Hawley Enterprises and by Trammel Crow (see April 16th Staff Report). The Commission should determine whether it wishes to pursue either of these requests. 5/22/98 Page 4 z Z J U, 0 0' W =. J I-.. WO 2 _a �w z= zo F- LU 2 0 O �1 0 F- LU U` -o .z: LU 0 D- r= ~ z Aggressive action on illegal signs. Amortization period for non -conforming off -premises signs. YEARS: 0 "Staged Compliance" Ordinance Adopted VOLUNTARY SIGN REDUCTION AGREEMENT SAMPLE TIMELINE Full compliance date for properties not subject to Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement ("Base Amortization Period") 05 1.5 Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreements signed. 3.0 Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreements implemented. Full Compliance Date for properties subject to 30% Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement 45 Full Compliance Date for properties subject to 45% Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement Full Compliance Date for properties subject to 60% Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement NOTICE. IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE_ IT_ IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. 6.0 7.5 FULL COMPLIANCE WITH TUKWILA SIGN CODE Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement - Example- Property Owner with 3 Wall Signs and 2 Freestanding Signs Sign Type Total Square Feet Total Allowed Square Feet Total Non - Conforming Square Feet Wall Sign #1 300 300 0 Wall Sign #2 400 200 200 Wall Sign #3 200 0 200 Freestanding #1 350 150 200 Freestanding #2 200 0 200 TOTALS 1450 650 800 If the property owner removes Freestanding Sign #2, this equals a 50% reduction in the freestanding sign non - conformance and a 25% reduction in total non - conforming square footage. Applying the weighting factors, the following result occurs: Reduction = (50% x 1/3) + (25% x 2/3) = 16.7% + 16.7% = 33.4 %. This would qualify for a 30% Voluntary Sign Reduction Agreement if implemented by Year 3. The property owner would not be required to come into full compliance until Year 4.5. 5/22/98 City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director TO: Planning Commission FROM: Steve Lancaste DATE: April 23, 1998 RE: Non - Conforming Signage Reduction Plan As described in the "Staff Report Concerning Possible Amendments to Sign Code" prepared April 16th, the two steps that would have to be taken to allow the Flower Drum sign to be re- faced for Epiros (and potentially, Riverton Family Pharmacy) are: 1) repeal the requirement to remove signs when a business closes; and 2) repeal the prohibition against refacing non- conforming signs. The Staff Report goes on to state that these code revisions could represent a significant step back from overall signage objectives, unless done in conjunction with a new sign amortization program. Developing a comprehensive sign amortization program would be time consuming. Another option is to adopt an interim approach that provides some flexibility for responding to situations such as Epiros', without sacrificing continued progress toward long -term objectives while we develop and debate a longer -term and more comprehensive amortization program. Non - Conforming Signage Concept This concept involves the development and implementation of a site - specific "Non- Conforming Signage Reduction Plan ". Under this approach, a property owner could propose modifications to existing, non - conforming signs if done in a manner that reduces overall non - conformity for the site by a percentage to be determined. Such proposals would be subject to the review and approval of the Director of Community Development or, if done as part of a significant redevelopment project, by the Board of Architectural Review. The Reduction Plan would be comprised of plans, drawings, photographs, text and /or other descriptive materials needed to describe the existing signage on a given site and to identify all non - conforming portions. The Plan would also describe the modifications necessary to reduce the overall degree of non - conformity on the site. The extent of a site's non - conformity would be determined by measuring the total square footage of all non - conforming signs. Next Step If the Planning Commission is interested in this interim approach, staff can draft code language that would be available for your review, possibly as early as the next scheduled Planning Commission meeting. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF TUKWILA Staff Report Concerning Possible Amendments to Sign Code (prepared April 16, 1998) for Planning Commission Work Session April 23, 1998 Following your decision on the Epiro's sign appeal at your March 26 meeting, the Planning Commission requested that staff provide options for possible sign code amendments. The purpose of this report is to 'provide that information. Background Since adoption of the Comprehensive Plan there has been considerable discussion about sign amortization.' In 1996, staff proposed a rather aggressive amortization program under which all nonconforming signs would have to be removed or otherwise brought into conformance within seven years. The Planning Commission endorsed this proposal and recommended it to the City Council. The City Council held hearings at which some business owners voiced significant concern. Additional work sessions and discussion occurred; however a comprehensive sign amortization program was not adopted. The City Council did slightly modify how nonconforming signs are treated, however, by prohibiting the "re- facing" of nonconforming signs (Ordinance No. 1792, 1997). Under the current sign code, there is no specific amortization schedule. Instead, the code attempts to achieve amortization of nonconforming signs gradually, through restrictions on their modification and re- use. The right to continue use of a nonconforming sign is lost under the following circumstances: • TMC 19.28.030(1): When there is a change in the use of the land, building or tenant space. • TMC 19.28.030(2): When there are "substantial" alterations or enlargements to the site or building exterior. • TMC 19.28.030(3): When there are changes to the letter style, size, background, message or sign structure which requires manufacturing a new or modified sign face or structure. • TMC 19.28.040: Additionally, when a business closes, all associated signage must be removed within 30 days. 1 In this memo, "amortization" refers to any regulation under which nonconforming signs are required to be brought into conformance or removed over time. • Planning Commission Staff Report April 16, 1998 Page 2 z There is considerable frustration with this approach to nonconforming sign amortization, as was = highlighted recently by the Epiro's sign situation.2 Some problems associated with our current approach w CL to sign amortization include: m -1U • It is difficult to determine when alterations or enlargements to the site or structure are "significant." U o Also, this provision may act as a disincentive for business and property owners to invest in property co W upgrades. co ld • Requiring that signage be immediately removed when a business closes contributes to an appearance u. Q • A blanket prohibition against re- facing nonconforming signs allows little flexibility in dealing with unique to =W I— 1 zI._ Addressing the Epiro's Situation i— p z I— Two steps would have to be taken to allow the former Flower Drum sign to be re -faced for Epiro's use3. 2 D First, the code provision requiring the removal of signs when a business closes would have to be repealed v 0 retroactively (or at least lengthened significantly). This would convert the existing Flower Drum sign o D (along with many other signs in the City) from,being "illegal" to being "legally nonconforming." Second, the W W prohibition against re- facing nonconforming signs would have to be repealed. H U LI t- This would represent a significant step back from the City's sign amortization commitment under z. Comprehensive Plan Policy 8.1.14, unless done in conjunction with a new sign amortization program v cn. acceptable to the community. Some ideas for such a program follow. j H. z of vacancy and decline. situations. Other Amortization Approaches 1. Establish a deadline for removing or modifying all nonconforming signs. In 1996, the Planning Commission recommended a code amendment to require that all nonconforming signs be removed or otherwise brought into full compliance within seven (7) years. The City Council did not adopt this recommendation, but has continued to express interest in developing an amortization program that would be more acceptable to the community. Some possible modifications to the original recommendation you may wish to consider are: • Establish some reasonable "leeway" for bringing nonconforming signs into conformance. For example, a pre- existing sign that is nonconforming only because it is one foot taller than the code requires, could be defined as "conforming." 2 It should be recognized that in the Epiro's situation, additional factors were involved, including the code's prohibition of off - premises signs. It should be noted that Riverton Family Pharmacy is in a position similar to Epiro's, in that this business also suffers from a lack of visibility on Pacific Highway. A solution to the Epiro's situation could also provide an equal opportunity for Riverton Family Pharmacy. "These steps would have to be taken to allow re -use of the sign even if the owner were to undertake a lot consolidation or lot line adjustment. However, a lot consolidation or lot line adjustment might provide other opportunities for Epiro's signage along the highway. < ' Planning Commission Staff Report April 16, 1998 Page 3 • Lengthen the amortization period beyond seven (7) years. (We would note that the first idea would add considerable complexity and require a greater commitment of staff time to administer.) Establish a "menu" approach to sign amortization. The City could establish a program that allows some re -use (re- facing) of existing nonconforming signs, in exchange for reductions in the overall degree of nonconformity for the property as a whole. Using the Epiro's example, such a program might allow the Flower Drum sign to be re- faced, in exchange for removing or reducing some of the other nonconforming signage on the property. Again, this type of program could be complex and require considerable staff time to administer. 3. Establish a "hybrid" approach, combining features of 1 and 2. A "hybrid" approach could have the following features: • Establish a "base" amortization period of, say 3 years. Properties which take no other actions during this period (see below) would be required to come into conformance by the end of this period. • Allow the ability to extend the base amortization period for properties that reduce their overall degree of nonconformity according to some formula. For example, a property which reduced the overall nonconforming sign area (square footage) on the site by 40% might be granted an additional 18 months before coming into full compliance. 4. Adopt the Sign Code amendments suggested by Hawley Enterprises. • Allow the re- facing of nonconforming signs without a permit. • Require a permit for re- facing a nonconforming sign only in the event of a simultaneous change in the property owner and tenant space. • Allow the structure of a nonconforming sign to remain standing at the closure and vacation of a business. Under this proposal, only the advertising copy relating to the vacated business would have to be removed. Please refer to the Staff Report for the Epiro's Sign Appeal (File #L98 -0001) for a more complete description and discussion of this alternative. Planning Commission Staff Report April 16, 1998 Page 4 z Other Sign Code Issues H z W w Nonconforming sign amortization is not the only troublesome aspect of our existing sign code. The Code 6 m was developed many years ago, when Tukwila's commercial area was much smaller and more i; p homogeneous than it is today. A number of amendments have occurred over the years, without a co 0 comprehensive analysis of the code or the cumulative effect of such changes. Some concerns, in addition w = to the treatment of nonconforming signs: co ~ Li. w0 • Is it desirable to have a single approach to signage city -wide, even though our different commercial 2 areas have very different characteristics? g • Do our definitions (or lack of definitions) for such critical terms as "site" and "premises" help or hinder = a in achieving overall signage and community image objectives? H w zI._ • Are our regulations concerning temporary signs workable, and do they achieve appropriate O objectives? w w U 0 • Enforcement has been a concern. Are some of our regulations "unenforceable" as a practical matter, O cn and how does this impact our enforcement of other aspects of the Code. 0 I- w W. As an example of other concerns about our sign code, please see the attached letter from Ann Klein of the 1 P. Trammell Crow Company (Attachment A). Trammel Crow is involved in the redevelopment of the u_ z Parkway Plaza Shopping Center. Our current code allows one freestanding sign per site, and one w additional freestanding sign of the site has more than 400 linear feet of street frontage. It does not allow a c2 third freestanding sign, regardless of the size of the site or length of street frontage (the subject property z /— has approximately 2, 260 linear feet of street frontage). While this is the kind of issue that the Planning Commission and City Council could address as a simple code amendment if they so desire, it may be another indicator of the need to take a comprehensive look at our sign code. Summary Epiro's situation In the near -term, there appear to be only two options for allowing adequate freestanding signage along Highway 99 for Epiro's: 1. Repeal (or lengthen) the existing code requirements for removal of signs upon the closing of a business and repeal the prohibition against re- facing nonconforming signs, or 2. Lot consolidation or lot line adjustment in conjunction with the erection of a new, conforming freestanding sign. The first option is not recommended by staff unless done in conjunction with a revised approach to amortization of nonconforming signs. Several alternative approaches are discussed above. The second option is not supported by the property owner, and cannot be accomplished without the owner's concurrence. , Planning Commission Staff Report April 16, 1998 Page 5 Sign Code Amendment If the Planning Commission wishes to undertake a comprehensive review and re -write of the sign code, this will have a significant impact on staffing. This will be a time - consuming endeavor, and has not been anticipated for 1998 in the Department of Community Development work plan. As you are no doubt aware, DCD has several critical projects under way that would be extremely difficult to defer. However, we recognize the importance of signage issues, particularly as they related to efforts to revitalize the Pacific Highway Corridor. (NOTE: Unfortunately, I will be out of town on April 23, and will be unable to participate in your discussion of these matters that evening. I will be back in town on April 27, and would be happy to speak with you at any time thereafter. I can be reached at 206.431.3670. Steve L.) z mi- w !. u6D O 0 : W= J w0 u_ ¢ w =w zf- F— 0 LL! ui O 9' O F-1' • W> IL'F" Z U uy O z March 27, 1998 Mr. Steve Lancaster. Director of Community Development City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 RE: Sign Code Revision Proposal Parkway Plaza - Tukwila, Washington Dear Mr. Lancaster: As you know, Parkway Plaza Shopping Center is presently undergoing an extensive re- development that will enhance both the property's aesthetic presence, and the retail environment for the community. Throughout the permitting process, it was discovered that re- development will trigger non- conformance of our three existing pylon signs. Under the current code, we face the possibility of losing one of the signs which creates a true hardship for the property's new owner in attracting quality tenants. Due to circumstances as detailed below, we feel a revision to the current sign code may be warranted. The purpose of this letter is to provide you with necessary background information, and to propose a revision to Section 19.132.140 of the Sign Code (enclosed). Introduction: Currently, Tukwila's sign code dictates that properties are allowed one freestanding sign per site. One additional sign is allowed for sites with at least 400 linear feet of street frontage. Under this scenario, large parcels, with unusually high amounts of contiguous street frontage (such as Parkway Plaza with over 2,260 linear feet) are penalized. Given the competitive nature of the current retail environment, it is important that we are able to furnish our tenants with as much exposure as possible. The best way for us to accomplish this is to provide them with adequate street exposure and signage. While we understand the motivation for strict code enforcement, we believe there are instances where the code may not adequately address the unique needs of such a large property. ATTACHMENT A ' z = Z J U. U 0 co 0 W =. uj0 ga �a � W Z= I—. I— 0 Z O �. w W! • o ..z. 0 z Mr. Steve Lancaster March 27, 1998 Page Two Comparable Property Analysis: The property analysis listed below highlights the ten largest landowners within the City of Tukwila. These properties were selected based on the largest commercial land parcels within the City's central business district. Property Owner 1. Southcenter Joint Venture 2. Pacific Gulf Properties 3. MBK Northwest 4. Lowe Northwest 5. Yellow Freight Systems 6. Group Health Cooperative 7. Tractor & Equipment 8. Baker Commodities 9. Jamestown 16 LP 10. Paul Sade Size (Acres) 38.06 29.79 28.52 17.38 12.79 12.48 12.01 11.87 11.84 10.83 Land Use Shopping Center Industrial- Warehouse Shopping Center Office Industrial Industrial -High Tech Industrial Industrial Shopping Center Industrial- Warehouse Property Name Southcenter Mall Andover Executive Park Parkway Plaza Southcenter Corp. Square Yellow Freight Systems Group Health Cooperative NC Machinery Company Baker Commodities Park Place Costco Aerial photographs and a map have been enclosed in order to provide you with additional information as to their location and related street frontage. Based on this analysis, iVMK Northwest is the third largest property owner within Tukwila's central business district. Furthermore, Parkway Plaza is unique from the other land parcels with respect to its size, location, and contiguous street frontage. Recommendation: 1V1BK Northwest and Trammell Crow Company understand and support the City's enforcement of a strict sign code policy. However, we believe that exceptions should be made for properties that fall within certain parameters. These guidelines should take into consideration a property's overall characteristics such as: size, use, location, and street frontage. Once these attributes are applied to this analysis, it is evident that Parkway Plaza should be considered unique. Trammell Crow Company requests the City of Tukwila's assistance in either granting us a variance or revising the existing code. If the City supports a revision, Trammell Crow Company would suggest incorporating the following language as "Exception 2" under the existing code: "Legally described land parcels within the City of Tukwila's central business district with greater than 800 linear feet of contiguous street frontage bordering commercially zoned areas may be permitted to erect one additional free standing sign." : • Mr. Steve Lancaster March 27, 1998 Page Three We believe that allowing certain types of variances can still accomplish our goal of a community that is able to preserve its visual aesthetics, while also serving to promote the surrounding business community. We look forward to working with the City of Tukwila in order to reach an agreement which accomplishes both of our objectives. I appreciate your assistance in addressing our request for a signage variance at your earliest convenience. If you have any questions or concerns please call me at (206) 575 -8090. Sincerely, TRAMMELL CROW COMPANY Ann F. Klein Vice President Enclosure cc: Mayor Wally Rants Mr. Mason Frank Mr. Craig Ramey . { (t w 0 w z' I, w0 L.L. = F—= o. Z F—. w w; U 0' off' 0 I- LIJ =0 lL F- - O; wz OF". z PARKWAY U la IR NI-17a R +1,000,000 so. T. (WITH OVER I Mn.E OP PRONTAOZ ALONG OOUIHCIINTUR PARKWAY/ EHTEELTAIfiMBHT HCD.TALHAHTS ACT Y THEATRD Re11RRw e«. Rewn IMO hin.lonHetni.auu OTANPORO'D DAWAED W' UN CODT PLUG CLAIM JUMPER DART BPORTD MICHAEL'S CUCWn cucINA COMP DOA KRAUSE 0 RCP RODIN ROBE ETHAN ALLEN TONY F10MAD O/iUO EMPORIUM THE DON HOME DTORE WWNERD PARTY CITY BPORTD AUTHOR/Y AZTECA ZANY URAI)4 UOROEND NEWPORT DAY BHOC PAVILLION ORRICE MAX APPLEDEE'D CROWN UOOKD LINEND N TFONOO PET,MART B STAND! BNNER Mar MIXT WM Oa WIiMW I. MN%WI M)K MRK NORTHWEST 76 O1M 0011AVR ITI!!T TUALITAN, ORtOON 11111 71/ 4 I11•UIO ile: 35mm Drawing eclipse Figure 2 — 500 foot RMiEva, from Projefit _ 21998 Electric Lightwave, Inc.'s Green River Fiber tWeNTER ELECTRIC LIGHTWAVE 1301 120th Avenue NE Bellevue, WA 98005 Direct: (425) 450-0249 Fax: (425) 450-9691 KING/LIGHT;/INDUSTRIAL ELECTRIC Figure 2 - Surrounding LIGHTWAVE eclipse. Area Map 1301 120th Avenue NE Bellevue, WA 98005 Direct: (425) 450-0249 Electric Lightwave, Inc.'s Green River Fiber Project Fax: (425) 450-9691