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