Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Report CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS PLANNING REPORT CASE NUMBER: 2008-0203 DATE: February 6, 2008 TO: Columbia Heights Planning Commission APPLICANT: City of Columbia Heights REQUEST: Zoning Amendment to the Zoning Code as it relates to Temporary Signage PREPARED BY: Jeff Sargent, City Planner BACKGROUND On May 29, 2007, the City Council adopted Ordinance 1523, being an Ordinance relating to the use of temporary signage. The ordinance accomplished the following: 1. Required a permit for each temporary sign at a price of $20 per permit. 2. Required that no more than four temporary sign permits could be issued per business per calendar year. 3. Required that temporary sign permits may be good for no more than 30 days each. The City Council also established a sunset clause on Ordinance 1523, set to expire on April 29, 2008. This was done to ensure that the ordinance was practical and fair to business owners throughout Columbia Heights. At this time, staff proposes permanently amending the zoning code regarding temporary signage to better implement the intent of the goals of the Comprehensive Plan and the th Design Guidelines adopted for the Central Avenue and 40 Avenue corridors. A temporary sign is defined in the City Code as “A sign, banner, pennant, valance, or advertising device intended to be displayed for a limited period of time, whether portable or attached to the principal structure”. The zoning code previous to Ordinance 1523 allowed for temporary signage that was not consistent with the intent of the th Comprehensive Plan or Design Guidelines for the Central Avenue and 40 Avenue corridors. The previous code allowed for clutter that was aesthetically unappealing and did not implement the policies outlined in Design Guidelines. Since the establishment of City of Columbia Heights Planning Commission February 6, 2008 Text Amendment, Temporary Signage Case # 2008-0203 Ordinance 1523, there has been a substantial change in use of temporary signage throughout the City, resulting in less clutter, higher streetscape appeal and better implementation of policies that are outlined in the Design Guidelines. Lack of effective regulation regarding temporary signage was found in the following areas: 1. The permitted location of a temporary sign on a building. 2. The number of temporary signs allowed on a building at any given time. 3. The duration in which a temporary banner may be displayed for. 4. Freestanding portable signage less than 8 square feet in area. LOCATION. Previous to Ordinance 1523, the Sign Code allowed temporary signs to be placed anywhere on the building. The code allowed for signs to hang from canopies, roofs, posts, and the like. (Figure 1, and Figure 2). FIGURE 1 FIGURE 2 Appropriate language was be added to the ordinance limiting the placement of a temporary sign to ensure direct and full contact with the wall to which it is affixed. This placement is preferred, as it would promote a better aesthetic appeal. Temporary signs can no longer be strung above bay doors or hung from a canopy. A specific intent of the Design Guidelines is to focus on enhancing the building’s architectural features, and regulating the placement of the signage achieved this. For this reason, Ordinance 1523 has been a success. NUMBER. The previous Sign Code allowed any number of temporary signs to be placed on the building at any given time, and restricted each sign to no more than 60 square feet in size. (Figure 3 and Figure 4). Page 2 City of Columbia Heights Planning Commission February 6, 2008 Text Amendment, Temporary Signage Case # 2008-0203 FIGURE 3 FIGURE 4 Allowing any number of temporary signs on a building increased the amount of clutter on the building and decreased its aesthetic value. In relation the businesses along th Central and 40 Avenues, it was counterintuitive to mandate strict architectural design guidelines for a building, only to allow businesses to place as many temporary signs on the building as they pleased. Ordinance 1523 added language to the ordinance restricting the number of temporary signs a business would be able to display at any given time to two. This was more consistent with the Design Guidelines as it allowed a better promotion of the architectural detailing of each building. DURATION. The previous Sign Code not only allowed for any number of temporary signs to be placed on a building, it also allowed for the temporary signs to be in place for an indefinite amount of time. The intent of temporary signs is for promotional purposes, not for permanent advertising. However, with no time duration established for temporary sign display, businesses could legally display temporary signs for any amount of time. (Figure 5 and Figure 6) FIGURE 5 FIGURE 6 Page 3 City of Columbia Heights Planning Commission February 6, 2008 Text Amendment, Temporary Signage Case # 2008-0203 Ordinance 1523 added language to the Sign Code restricting the amount of time a temporary sign could be in place for to 30 days, as well as restricting the total number of temporary signs a business could display in a calendar year to four. This has dramatically reduced the clutter on commercial buildings throughout the City, which in turn has made the buildings more consistent with the Design Guidelines. FIGURE 7 FIGURE 8 PORTABLE SIGNS. The previous Sign Code allowed for any number of freestanding temporary signs, as long as they did not exceed 8 square feet in size. The Sign Code did not regulate where the signs may be located, the materials the signs could be made of, the professionalism of the sign, or how long the sign may be erected. (Figure 9 and Figure 10). FIGURE 9 FIGURE 10 Ordinance 1523 added language to the Sign Code limiting the number of freestanding portable signs to one per business, as well as the placement of such signs on the property to no closer than five feet from the front property line. Doing so has dramatically reduced clutter associated with the placement of numerous signs along Central Avenue and has increased the aesthetic value of Columbia Height’s commercial corridors. Page 4 City of Columbia Heights Planning Commission February 6, 2008 Text Amendment, Temporary Signage Case # 2008-0203 Ordinance 1523 has also defined a sandwich board sign and has eliminated the ability for businesses to utilize stick-in-the-ground signs. Staff feels that eliminating “stick-in- the-ground” signs has been beneficial, as these types of signs tend to get knocked down, pulled out of the ground, or blown over. (Figure 11 and Figure 12) FIGURE 11 FIGURE 12 Without effective regulation to establish minimum standards to guide the use of th temporary signage, 40 Avenue and particularly Central Avenue was having a shoddy, cluttered and unkempt appearance. Since the establishment of Ordinance 1523, the th appearance of Central Avenue and 40 Avenue has dramatically increased. The proposed amendments do not take away the ability for a business owner to utilize temporary signage; rather it mandates a set of minimum standards to display a temporary sign, in the same manner as displaying permanent signage. The proposed Ordinance is exactly the same as Ordinance 1523, however would be a permanent ordinance with no sunset clause. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Discussion of regulations begins with identifying the community’s goals for aesthetics and image found in the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the goals; the purpose of the zoning ordinance is to guide private activity toward the achievement of those goals. The City’s Comprehensive Plan indicates several goals for the economic and commercial vitality of the city. Some of these goals include: 1. Establishing and maintaining a strong sense of community. 2. Strengthening the image of the community as a desirable place to live and work. 3. Enhancing the physical appearance of the community. Page 5 City of Columbia Heights Planning Commission February 6, 2008 Text Amendment, Temporary Signage Case # 2008-0203 4. Improving the image of commercial areas as friendly and safe environments for residents and visitors. The implementation of these goals centers on the City’s ability to redevelop the commercial and retail sectors and establish a friendly working and living environment for the residents of and visitors to Columbia Heights. A coalition was formed in 2002 to draft the Design Guidelines required for future th development and redevelopment projects along 40 Avenue and Central Avenue. The Design Guidelines establish a set of minimum standards for developers and the City to follow when constructing new buildings or building additions to existing ones. The intent of the Design Guidelines is to establish a basis for implementing the goals outlined in the Comprehensive plan. The proposed zoning amendments facilitate the ability to carry this intent forward. The objective in the Design Guidelines for signage is that “signs should be architecturally compatible with the style, composition, materials, colors and details of the building, and with other signs on nearby buildings. Signs should be an integral part of building and site design” The Design Guidelines regulate such things as the types of signs to be used, the shape of signs, the placement of signs on the building, the colors and materials the signs could incorporate, and the illumination of the signs. The Design Guidelines incorporate these specific criteria in order to enhance the aesthetic appeal of the city. FINDINGS OF FACT The City Council shall make the following four findings before granting approval of a request to amend the City Code. These findings are as follows: a) The amendment is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The proposed amendment would make the current standard for temporary signage more consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and Design Guidelines. b) The amendment is in the public interest and is not solely for the benefit of a single property owner. The Design Guidelines coalition formed in 2002 was partly comprised of citizens and business owners representing the public at large. The proposed amendment would establish standards along Central Avenue, which would better reflect the intent of the Design Guidelines. For this reason, the proposed amendment would be beneficial to the public. Page 6 City of Columbia Heights Planning Commission February 6, 2008 Text Amendment, Temporary Signage Case # 2008-0203 c) Where the amendment is to change the zoning classification of a particular property, the existing use of the property and the zoning classification of property within the general area of the property in question are compatible with the proposed zoning classification. The zoning classification of land will not change. d) Where the amendment is to change the zoning classification of a particular property, there has been a change in the character or trend of development in the general area of the property in question, which has taken place since such property was placed in its current zoning classification. The zoning classification of land will not change. RECOMMENDATION: City Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval of the proposed zoning amendment as outlined in the attached draft ordinance. Motion: The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the text amendments as outlined in the attached draft ordinance. Attachments Draft Ordinance  Page 7