City Council Packet - 09/19/1977 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION
SEPTEMBER 19, 1977, 7:30 P.M.
CHARLES F. TIGARD GRADE SCHOOL
ADMINISTRATION OFFICES
AGENDA:
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. TCYS PRESENTATION - Re: Financial Assistance
4, TUALATIN PROJECT UPDATE - Presentation to Council by Oscar Hagg;
Palmer Torvand, Manager Tualatin Valley Irrigation Distr.; and
Bob Barbo
5. NPO X65 - Discussion regarding Study area S of Durham Road in
vicinity of Durham Waste Water Treatment Plant
6. DISCUSSION RE: SIGN CODE REVISIONS - Freestanding Sign Section
7. APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATE TO SERVE ON DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
(a) Recommendation of Planning Commission
8. DISCUSSION RE: PROPOSED LEASE OF AIR RIGHTS - Recommendation of
City Administrator.
9. PROGRESS REPORT ON REVISED SUBDIVISION PROCESSING PROCEDURES
10. MAP AND INVENTORY of all City owned property in Parks, Greenways,
and unimproved land under City jurisdiction and that committed to
the City by current developments underway or approved. - Presenta-
tion by Ben Altman for Council information and discussions.
Requested by the Mayor.
11. OTHER
12. EXECUTIVE SESSION RE: City Administrator applicants
13. ADJOURNMENT
0
�o
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 19, 1977, 7:30 P.M.
CHARLES F TIGARD SCHOOL - ADMINISTRA'I''JE Jf'FICES
1. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Mayor Wilbur A. :t.shop; Councilmen John E. _ook, .;ian W.
Mickelson, Kenneth W. Scheckla, Lynn R. Wakem; R.B. Adams, C' of of
Police; Dick Bolen, P).anning Director; tsruc.. P. Cla rlc, City a .min-
istrator; Doris Hartig, City Rcccrder; John Laws, As:.jciate PL�, .ning
Director- J.D. Bailey, Legal Counsel.
2. TIGARD 6 P186TX SERVIC�( PRESENTATION - Re: Financial Assistance
(a) Don Pieters, Chairman of T.C.Y.S. !�oard, introduced Mike Pieracci , Director ,
and Larry Shannon, Outgoing Chairman - Pieracci presented basic operational
expenses and stated T.C.Y S. was requesting funds in the amount of $7,445.28.
Lengthy discussion by Council and T.C.Y.S. 's representatives regarding
need for local support, funding sources, types of activities and programs,
relationship with the Tigard School Distrist.and referral system.
(b) The following people appeared and/or spoke in support of request for
funding:
Bob Mow, T.C.Y.S. staff member
Tom Brien, Executive Director of Oregon Council on Crime & Delinquency
Jerry Harkins, Washington County Juvenile Dept. Director
Gary Wagner, Fowler Junior High
Ed Gottlich, Tigard High School
Ted Fullmer, volunteer
Marvin Theonnes, Board Member
Al Popp, Board Member
Jerry Edward, Board Member
Charlie Bedford, Board Member
Floyd Bergmann, Board Member
Joy Cooper, Board Member
Nancy Varenkamp, volunteer
Doug Herr, Student Board Member
Steve Dettra, Student Board Member
Kelly Auerback, Student Board Member
John Haver, 15970 S.W 76th
(c) Further discussion by Council and staff regarding 1976-77 audit, approxi-
mate date of audit completion, adoption of supplemental budget and the
possibility of T.C.Y.S. 's request being placed on the November general
election ballot.
Councilman Wakem expressed support for the request.
Councilman Cook reminded Council there would be a Budget Committee meeting,
to consider adoption of a supplemental budget, held soon after the audit
is completed.
Pieracci stated T.C.Y S. was applying for a program grant (deadline for
application November 1st) and must reflect extent of local matching funds -
consequently T C Y.S. would need to know Council's intent no later than
October 15, 1977.
(d) Council directed staff to determine time required to place pror,:lsal on
November 4th general election b.:lLot.
Council concurred to meet with Budget Couunittee, as soon as uud? t _:as
been completed, to further consid !r T.C.Y.S. 's request.
3. TUALATIN PROJECT, PHASE II - Status Report
(a) Oscar Hagg explained the need for Eastern Washinbton County and tine
Washington County Board of County C^'nmissiUners to support project. Hagg
requested Council appoint two citizens (1 regular and 1 alternate) from the
City of Tigard to attend committee meetings regarding project.
Bob Barba, from the Bureau of Reclamation, Lynopsized project.
General discussion by Hagg, Barbo and Council followed.
Hagg stated the next meeting would be held at Washington County Courthouse
October 19th at 8:00 P.M. on the fourth floor.
(b) Council consensus was to consider appointment of two persons to committee
as soon as possible.
4. NPO #5 - Discussion regarding study area South of Durham Road, vicinity of
Durham Waste Water Treatment Plant
(a) Planning Director reviewed memo, to Council, regarding the following list
of uses proposed as being acceptable in an Institutional Zone:
PERMITTED USES
Customary Agricultural Operations including general farming, truck
farming, fruit orchards, nursery, greenhouses, and usual farm
buildings.
Office Buildings for executive or administrative uses and industrial
product sales and service, and professional offices or similar uses.
Research and Development Laboratories including experimental, testing
and processing facilities.
Manufacturing and Assembly of Electronic Instruments and Equipment
and Electrical Devices.
Manufacturing and Assembly of Precision Instruments, Tools or
Devices.
Trade, Skills or Industrial Schools.
Publishing, Printing, and Bookbinding Facilities.
Manufacturing of Medicines and Pharmaceuticals.
Page 2 - Study Session Minutes, September 19, 1977
CONDITIONAL USES
Indoor and Outdoor Recreac.:.;:n Facilities inciuding '•enr.is,
racquet and hand ball courts, and swimming facilities.
Institutional Uses including schaal.s, public utilities, such
waste water treatment facilities, lodges fog fraternal organi,,. •.cions,
and churches.
In addition, it is proposed that tries lot size, setback, and landscaping
standards of the M-4 zone be applicable.
General discussion by Council and staff followed.
(b) John Havery, NP0#5 member, expressed concerns with proposed zoning and
recommended area be zoned R-7.
Adrian Kroese, NPO X15 member, expressed concerns regarding area.
Craig Cowles, 13505 S.W. Village Glenn Drive, spoke in support of staff's
recommendation.
General discussion by Council and staff.
(c) Motion by Councilman Mickelson, seconded by Councilman Cook, directing
staff to prepare Ordinance to amend Ordinance No. 77-69, 'designating area
as Institutional Zone.
Approved by unanicnous vote of Council.
(d) Planning Director recommended Ordinance be further amended to change spine
road designation to be located between 76th and 79th, intersecting with
Bonita.
Council concurred
Director to provide Council with location map of proposed change in
September 26th packets.
5. PROPOSED LEASE OF AIR RIGHTS - Discussion
(a) City Administrator to make presentation at future meeting.
6. HIRANSPORT vs CITY OF TIGARD - Litigation Status
(a) City Administrator reported circuit court judge had ruled in favor of
the city - 30 days appeal period - Legal Counsel will report any further
development.
Council concurred to move to Executi!,e -Session - remaining agenda items to be
considered at future meeting.
10:00 P.M. recessed
Page 3 - Study Session Minutes, September 19, 1977
Reconvened 10:10 P.M.
Council went into executive session under r.l,e provisions of ORS 19:.660 (b) :a ."on-
sider applications for position of City Administrator.
Council reviewed all resumes received and S.:alected applications to be considered
further. Packets of selected applicants will be recire>>latad and considered
by Council at September 26th executive session. Concensus of Council was to .:. at
off accepting applications as of September 19th.
Meeting adjourned 10:55 P.M.
City Recorder -'City of,�- and
ATTEST:
Mayor - City of Tigard
Page 4 - Study Session Minutes, September 19, 1977
MEMORANDUM
To: City Council
From: Planning Department
Subject: Procedural report and status of subdivision applications
Date: September 19, 1977
Within this calendar year, 1977 (January through September) , the City
has been in receipt of 16 subdivision preliminary plats, totaling 523
lots. Of these 16 plats, 15 have been processed and approved. The
remaining plat is a planned development which will be processed at
such time as the general plan and program has been approved by ordi-
nance.
By ordinance (Ordinance 75-25) the Planning Director or his agent
within 60 days of the date of submission of the preliminary plat is
required to take action on the submission either by approval, modifi-
cation or denial. The average time for processing an application has
been ranging between four to six weeks. Staff has been trying to al-
ternate writing staff reports for subdivisions and minor land parti-
tions on a every-other-week basis. This allows time then for staff
to prepare Planning Commission agenda items (e.g. , zone changes, con-
ditional uses, etc. ) that are to be heard at a public hearing.
Upon submission of a subdivision application, a notification letter
of the proposed development is sent to all adjacent owners or persons
who have previously indicated interest in the development of the site.
The letter informs these people that proposed development plans are
available for their personal review at Tigard City Hall, and written
comments may be submitted for consideration at any time prior to the
date of anticipated final action, which is no less than ten- days after
the notification letter has been mailed. As of April 11, 1977, when
the Planning Director or his agent were empowered to administratively
process subdivisions, minor land partitions, and design review appli-
cations, staff has received very little input from citizens either in
support of or opposed to any development proposals. Those questions
which were asked were essentially general in nature (e.g. , size of
the development, number of lots, location) . None of the 11 subdivi-
sion applications which have been handled administratively have re-
sulted in an appeal to the Planning Commission either by the applicant
or aggrieved citizens as the result of the Planning Director's deci-
sion.
ii
v
M'L 40RANDUM
City Council
September 19, 1977
Page 2
z Finally, a notification letter and staff report describing the action
taken by the Planning Director is mailed out to adjacent property own-
ers on the same day as a letter is sent to the applicant informing
him of the action taken on his application. The purpose of this no-
tification letter is to give any aggrieved parties the opportunity to
appeal, if they so desire, action taken by the Planning Director.
In summation, the new procedures are producing the kind of benefits
hoped for when they were instituted. For example, the Planning Com-
mission work load and, therefore, length of meetings has been appre-
ciably lightened. Meetings are now adjourning at around 10:30 or
11:00 p.m, instead of after midnight. The applicant is pleased with
the more rapid turn over time and being saved the ordeal of a public
hearing. Adjacent property owners are better informed because we
now mail them a reduced copy of the proposed subdivision plat. And
finally, the fact that neither applicant nor adjacent property owner
has appealed one decision out of 11 approved plats (three times the
annual average until this year) indicates a well functioning review
system.
�r
.f
rµ:.
i
WASHINGTON COUNTY
PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING — 146 N.E. LINCOLN
j R HILLSBORO, OREGON 97123
I BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS COMMUNICATIONS DIVISION
RAY MILLER,
BILL BLOOM Chairman September 13, 1977
Room 26
VIRGINIA DAG G (503)648-8746
MILLER M.DURIS
RICHARD C.HEISLER
i
j
Mayor Wilbur Bishop
City of Tigard
12420 S.W. Main
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Dear Mayor Bishop:
Due to recent publicity, you are probably aware that the Washington County
Communications Division is actively planning and supporting the "911" Emergency
Telephone Number concept. Currently we are preparing to order this service for
several of the telephone exchanges in the Western portions of the County.
The Communications Division is interested in planning "911" Service for all the
County residents, and would like to extend an invitation to you to begin this
planning as soon as possible, in order to bring the "911" Service to as many
residents as possible.
The Communications Division is interested in discussing the possibility of dis-
patching service for your city. We believe that this Center provides its users
with a very efficient and cost effective solution to their dispatching problems.
Among the benefits shared by the Center users are better coordination between
agencies, professional dispatchers that are interested in their profession, and
modern up-to-date equipment that is redundantly installed to prevent failure.
Another benefit the communications users enjoy is radio maintenance service at
approximately one-half the going commercial rate.
The Washington County Communications Division would like also to extend an invi-
tation to you to observe the Center first-hand to help understand its operation,
and to ask any questions you might have.
We're looking forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
r4/-
Wll -c�or
Finance & Administraffion
FOL:jr
MEMORANDUM
To: City Council
From: Planning Department
Subject: Recommendations of Sign Code Committee and Planning Commis-
sion on Revisions to the Freestanding Sign Section of the
City Sign Code
Date: September 19, 1977
The attached document represents six months of work by a specially ap-
pointed sign code committee formed by the Planni-nq Commission and
Chamber of Commerce. As Council will recall, the first draft of a
proposed sign code revision met with sharp criticism from the business
community because they had not had an opportunity for involvement in
its formulation. This latest revision has had extensive input from
the business community, and, as a result, no one appeard opposing it
at the Planning Commission public hearing on September 6.
This revision deals only with freestanding signs, and the sign commit-
tee is resuming their meetings this fall to consider other types of
signs (e.g. , wall signs, projecting signs, etc. ) .
MEMORANDUM
To: Planning Commission
From: Planning Director
Subject: Sign Code Revisions
Date: September 6, 1977
At the Commission ' s August 22 study session -the following
revisions of the sign code committee' s recommendations were sug-
gested.
Page 3, Section 16 .28. 010 - The length of time given the
owner of a non-conforming sign to remove the sign would
be reduced from 30 days to 15 days.
Page 7, Section J - This section would be amended to state
that the pole cover requirement would only be required of
signs erected after the date of passage of this ordinance
and that the required address would be readable from pas-
sing automobiles.
Page 8, Sections L and M - The requirement that the sign
design be prepared by a professional designer would be de-
leted.
Page 5, last paragraph - The appeal of a planning director
decision would have a 20 day deadline.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Planning Department
SUBJECT: Recommendations of Sign Code Committee as Completed
on June 23, 1977
DATE: June 24, 1977
The Committee recommends that the following be deleted and
amended to read as follows:
16.12.020 be deleted and be amended to read as follows:
16.12.020 Application
Permits for the construction or placing of freestanding
signs pursuant to this section shall be issued only after the
following conditions have been met:
a. The applicant shall submit both a plot plan and
a scale drawing of the sign. The plot plan
shall be made to scale, and it shall indicate
the location of all buildings, property lines,
existing signs, streets, driveways, and
overhead power lines on the premises. In
addition, the plot plans shall show the
approximate location of neighboring signs
and buildings within 100 feet on either side
of the subject premises. The scale drawing
of the sign shall show the sign dimensions,
the colors, materials, construction, height above
ground, and source and intensity of illumination.
b. The application, including the information
required by Paragraph "a" above, shall be
submitted to either the Planning Director
(or his agent) , or the Design Review Board
at the discretion of the applicant. The
proposal shall be reviewed to determine
whether the sign as proposed is acceptable;
given its impact on public safety, the
architectural compatibility of the elements
of the sign, one with another, the
compatibility of the sign to its surroundings,
its aesthetic qualities, and its consistency
with the needs of the business or businesses to
which it relates. These aesthetic considerations
shall be made according t the criteria specified
in section C
SIGN CODE COPZIITTEE RECOMP+IENDATIONS
June 23, 1977
Page 2
c. The purpose of design review of signs is to
improve the quality of design and to attempt
to improve the general appearance of the
business and industrial community. The intent
of this process is to review the work submitted,
not to perform the design work for the applicant.
Neither is it the intention of this code to
substitute the personal taste of the reviewer(s)
for that of the applicant, but rather to
perform an objective analysis of the proposed
sign according to the standards imbodied herein.
Letters
Style (for legibility and continuity)
Size of copy (in relation to background)
Amount of copy (in relation to sign size)
Colors
Compatible with building colors
Compatible with eachother
Overall Design
As it relates to the building and is suitable to the
location.
16.24.015 Those signs which are non-conforming according
to Ordinance # may be continued until (ten years
after date of ordnance) except signs which are already non-
conforming, as per Section 16.24.010.
SIGN CODE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
June 23, 1977
Page 3
16.28.010 Non-conforming signs to be amended as follows:
(a) The planning director shall order the removal of any
sign erected in violation of the provisions of this title.
The planning director shall give fifteen (15) days' written
notice by registered mail to the owner of the sign or, if the
owner of the sign cannot be notified, to the owner of the
building, structure or premises on which such sign is located
to remove the sign or to bring it into compliance with this
title. If the owner of the building, structure or premises
upon which such sign is located fails to remove the sign
within thirty (30) days after receipt of written notice from
the building official, the building official or his duly
authorized representative, may remove such sign at cost to the
owner of the building, structure, or premises, and such costs
may be a lien against the land or premises on which the sign
is located and may be collected or foreclosed in the same
manner as liens otherwise entered in the liens docket of the
city.
Section 16.36.020 (5) be amended to read as follows:
Real Estate Directional Signs. Real estate signs advertising
an open house and located off the premises, limited to a
sign area of six square feet and a maximum dimension of four
feet may be erected and maintained, provided the display of
such sign shall be only during those hours the property is
available for inspection. No other off-premise directional
sign shall be allowed. No permits are required for such
signs, but the building official may establish reasonable
rules and regulations to prohibit sign clutter, erection of
unsafe signs or other problems in connection with the erection
of real estate directional signs.
Delet Section 16.36.050 and amend Section 16.36.040 be
amended to read as follows: Commercial and Industrial Zones.
Except as otherwise provided in this respect to the C-5 and
C-P commercial zone (see zoning Chapter 18), no sign for
which a sign permit is required shall be permitted in any
commercial zone except the following:
1. No signs shall be permitted in a C-5 commercial zone
except thos- specified in Title 18 for such zone.
„_•, 2. No sign sha" i be permitted in a C-P commercial zone
except those specified in Title 18.
•Zf
��r
SIGN CODE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
June 23, 1977
Page '4
3. Free standing signs shall be permitted as follows•
A. The primary criteria in determining freestanding
sign area and height shall depend on the designation
of the street which the sign is facing. Streets
or roads within the City of Tigard are designated
as follows: (This designation was determined by
traffic speed, number of lanes, and projected
or current use. )
B. One multi-faced freestanding sign identifying the
principal goods, products, facilities or services
available on the premises shall be permitted on
a premise.
DESIGNATED ARTERIAL STREETS
All of S.W. Durham Road within the city
All of S.W. Greenburg Road (north of North Dakota)
within the city
All of S.W. Hall Blvd. within the city
All of S.W. Pacific Highway within the city
All of S.W. Scholls Ferry Road within the city
All of S.W. Tigard Street (east of Tiedeman) with-
in the city
All of 68th Avenue (north of Hampton) within the city
All of 72nd Avenue (south of Hampton) within the city
DESIGNATED COLLECTOR STREETS
S.W. Ash Avenue within the city from S.W. Burnham
to S.W. Hill Street
All of S.W. Bonita Road within the city
All of S.W. Bull Mountain Road within the city
All of S.W. Burnham Street within the city
All of S.W. Cascade Street within the city
All of S.W. Commercial within the city
ss-
SIGN CODE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
June 23, 1977
Page 5
All of S.W. Gaarde Street within the city
All of S.W. Grant Street within the city
All of S.W. Greenburg Road (south of S.W. North
Dakota) within the city
All of S.W. Hampton within the city
All of S.W. Hunziker Street within the city
All of S.W. Main Street within the city
All of S.W. McDonald Street within the city
All of S.W. North Dakota within the city
All of S.W. Pfaffle Road within the city
All of S.W. Sattler Road within the city
All of S.W. Summerfield Drive within the city
All of S.W. Tiedeman Street within the city
All of S.W. Walnut Street within the city
All of S.W. 98th Avenue within the city
All of S.W. 100th Avenue within the city
All of S.W. 121st Avenue within the city
LOCAL STREETS
All other existing streets within the city
(Ordinance 75-40 S4, 1975, Ordinance 72-68 S1, 1972:
Ordinance 70-32 S210-8, 1970)
C. No freestanding sign shall be permitted on properties
zoned commercial or industrial on arterial streets
except the following:
1. Area limit: The maximum square footage of
sign face allowable shall be 70 square feet or
a total of 140 square feet for all sign faces.
If the sign is moved back from the property
line which parallels the street the sign is
facing, the sign area may be increased at the
t
SIGN CODE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
June 23, 1977
Page
rate of one square foot per each lineal foot
distance that the nearest portion of the sign
is behind the property line (or 15 feet from
the pavement edge, whichever is less) to a
maximum of 90 square feet, or a total of 180
square feet, for all sign faces.
2. Height: No freestanding sign shall exceed 20
feet at the right-of-way edge. Height may
increase one foot for each 10 feet of setback
from the property line (or 15 feet from the
pavement edge, whichever is less) to a maximum
of 22 feet.
D. No freestanding sign shall be permitted on properties
zoned commercial or industrial on collector streets
except the following:
1. Area limit: The maximum square footage of sign
face allowable shall be 25 square feet, or a total
of 50 square feet, for all sign faces. If the
sign is moved back from the property line which
parallels the street, the sign area may be increased
at the rate of one square foot per each lineal foot
distance the nearest portion of the sign is behind
the property line (or 15 feet from the pavement
edge, whichever is less) to a maximum of 45 square
feet, or a total of 90 square feet, fo;, all sign
faces.
2. Height: No freestanding sign shall exceed 16 feet
at the right-of-way edge. Height may increase
one foot for each ten feet of setback from the
property line (or 15 feet from the pavement edge,
whichever is less) to a maximum of 18 feet.
E. No freestanding sign shall be permitted on properties
with commercial or industrial zoning located on streets
defined as local streets except the following:
1. Area limit: The maximum square .footage of sign
face allowable shall:be 16 square feet, or a total
of 32 square feet, for all sign faces. If the sign
is moved back from the property line which paral-
lels the street the sign is facing, the sign area
may be increased at the rate of J square foot per
each lineal foot distance the nearest portion of
the sign is behind the property line (or 15 feet
from the pavement ege, whichever is less) to a
maximum of 26 square feet, or a total of 52 square
feet for all sign faces.
SIGN CODE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
June 23, 1977
Page 7
2. Height: No freestanding sign shall exceed 14
feet at the right-of-way edge. Height may in-
crease one foot for each ten feet of setback
from the property line (or 15 feet from the pavement
edge, whichever is less) to a maximum of 16 feet.
F. Supplemental design features. If the design reviewer
determines that the sign's visual appeal. and overall
design quality would be served, an additional 50 percent
of the allowable sign area and 25 percent of sign height
(to include pole cover) may be permitted. However,
no copy will be permitted in the additional area and
height permitted.
Freestanding Sign
G. An instance in which a premise fronts on more than one
street, standards for the street which the sign is
oriented shall be the controlling set. In the event
the sign is oriented equally towards more than one
street, the larger of the two shall be permitted.
H. No freestanding sign permitted pursuant to this section
except time and temperature sign and theatre marque and
auto service stations in order to display the current
price of gasoline shall include a sign of the type
known as a "reader board". For the purposes of this
section, a "reader board" is defined as a sign
designed so as to permit the charging of message of
the sign regularly or frequently as, for example, a
sign made up of a blackboard, changeable paperfaced
or a rack designed to hold movable letters.
I. Each freestanding sign shall be surrounded by an area
set aside to protect the sign from vehicles negotiat-
ing in the parking area of the business to which the
sign relates, and the area so set aside shall be
landscaped. The size and shape of the area set aside
and the landscaping shall be represented in the plot
plan required by this section and shall be subject to
the review and control of the planning director or
agent. On existing sites where a landscape island
is not feasible, the minimum clearance below the
lowest portion of a freestanding sign and the ground
below shall be 14 feet in any vehicle maneuvering area.
J. Each sign must incorporate a pole cover into its
design, and the address number of:the premises being
identified must be exhibited on either the freestand-
ing sign or the building and be readable from the street.
1
SIGN CODE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
June 23, 1977
Page 8
K. No freestanding sign, or any portion of any free-
standing sign, shall be located on or be projected
over any portion of a street, sidewalk or other public
right-of-way or property. Sign may be located within
setback areas only as provided in Section 16.20.040.
Z. 'rlhen a premise contains more than a single tenant
but is not defined as a shopping center, the provision
of a freestanding sign shall take into consideration
the needs of all separate tenants. The design shall
be prepared by a professional designer and take into
consideration the need for providing a signing system
which is harmonious in appearance and legibility.
Building owner shall provide at his own expense a
common support for all tenant signage. Said support
should be engineered to withstand 20 lbs. per sauare
feet wind load of completed display. Up to an
additional 50 percent of sign copy area may be
permitted when deemed necessary by the planning
director to adequately identify the separate tenants.
M. Shopping centers or industrial parks, defined as areas
of not less than eight business units and consisting
of not less than four acres, shall establish a single
signing format. The design shall be prepared by a
Professional sign designer. The sign shall include
the complex name and street number. Up to an additional
50 percent of sign area may be permitted when deemed
necessary by the planning director to adequately,
identify the complex. This increase should ter judged
according to unique identification needs and
circumstances which necessitate additional area to
make the sign sufficiently legible. When a shop-
ping center of industrial park has more than one main
entrance on separate frontages, a second freestanding
sign may be allowed. The two allowable signs shall
face separate frontages and are not intended to be
viewed simultaneously.
4. Wall Signs: In addition to signs permitted by this section,
wall signs may be erected or maintained but shall not
exceed in gross area twenty percent of the face of the
building to which the sign is attached or on which the
sign is maintained. Signs placed on or within one foot of
the display windows and designed to be viewed from the
exterior of the building shall be included in determining
the amount of signing on such building face. Wall signs
may not project more than 18 inches from the wall to
which they are attached.
a
SIGN CODE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
June 23, 1977
Page 9
5. Real Estate Signs: No more than two signs offering the
premises for sale, lease or inspection by the public
shall be permitted. The total area of each sign shall not
exceed 32 square feet. Such signs may be modified to in-
dicate that the property has been sold.
6. Moving Signs: No sign shall have or consist of any
moving, rotating or otherwise animated part.
7. Political Signs: For political sign regulations, see
Section 16.40.010 (b).
8. Projecting Signs: For projecting sign regulations, see
Section 16.40.070.
9. Roof Signs: For roof sign regulations, see Section 16.40.080.
10. Directional Signs: Such signs shall be as permitted in
Section 16.36.020 (4).
Section 16.40.060(b) be amended to read, "No flashing signs
except those showing time and temperature only shall be permitted. "
Add the following paragraph to the appeals section 16.34.010,
following the first paragraph in that section.
Any person who has submitted application for a sign permit
to the Planning Director, pursuant to the options provided in
section 16.12.020 (b), may appeal the Planning Director's
decision to the Design Review Board.
s:
.��t��s,��''•�.pzr�.vet i „�, �Ps`��Ci�.',:K t r etrF "'-A'-.:•`s�' .,:v�•,�:r. +t >�&rn :*..-.. .J:;