Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-10-26 Business Meeting MinutesDeschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701 -1960 (541) 388 -6570 - Fax (541) 385 -3202 - www.deschutes.org MINUTES OF BUSINESS MEETING DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MONDAY, OCTOBER 26, 2009 Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St., Bend Present were Commissioners Tammy Baney, Dennis R. Luke and Alan Unger. Also present were Dave Kanner, County Administrator; Cynthia Smidt and Nick Lelack, Community Development; Laurie Craghead, Legal Counsel, and one other citizen. No representatives of the media were present. Chair Baney opened the meeting at 10:00 a.m. 1. Before the Board was Citizen Input. None was offered. 2. Before the Board was Continuation of a Public Hearing on Ordinance No. 2009 -023, a Text Amendment regarding the Sign Ordinance. Cynthia Smidt gave an overview of the item. Representatives of several groups and the City of La Pine all submitted comments. Only Carlson Sign Company has not done so at this point. The County's Planning Commission had no further comments at their last meeting, nor did the City of La Pine. Ms. Craghead said she realized that the drive -up window issue needs to be better defined (specifically menu boards). Commercial speech is not as protected as private speech, but an additional ground mounted sign rather than a "reader board ". A discussion then took place regarding other kinds of drive -up windows, such as those used by banks. Commissioner Unger stated that 14 square feet is not that large; he wondered why that figure was selected. He asked what the cities require. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, October 26, 2009 Page 1 of 3 Pages Ms. Smidt said this has changed over time, but the maximum now is 14 square feet. Ms. Craghead stated that other jurisdictions don't prescribe content. Chair Baney said that she would like to have comments from Carlson Sign Company before taking action. Ms. Craghead asked what comments it is believed they wanted. Ms. Baney observed that she wants to make sure the best policy is adopted. Ms. Smidt believes that there will be additional helpful comments. Chair Baney said that this is the largest sign company in the area and this input may be important. Ms. Craghead asked whether the statement regarding "menu board" should remain. Case law is not clear, and probably the term "fast food" should not be used, either. Commissioner Unger said that 12 foot square should be okay for this use. Chair Baney expressed concerns about future challenges. Ms. Craghead said that the County wants to avoid potential problems in the future regarding drive - up businesses such as dry cleaners, pharmacies and so on. Chair Baney would like to see this opened up more broadly. Commissioner Unger is looking at the opposite, not broadening it, but that menu boards might be something banks or others might want to do in the future. The hearing was continued to 10 a.m., November 9, allowing only the submission of written documentation. 3. Before the Board were Additions to the Agenda. Commissioner Unger said that a company is willing to donate homeless shelters. The shelters are self - contained and are either 14 x 14 or 16 x 16 feet. No one at the regional meeting regarding homelessness knows where to put them. He suggested to Linda Johnson that they bring over three units — one for each county — and see what works. They have heat and electrical power. Often "granny flats" or buildings for medical hardship cases allow for such things. Commissioner Luke stated that land use is not that simple, if you plan to site something without septic systems and other improvements. Commissioner Unger noted that if the local counties don't take them, they are going elsewhere. Chair Baney said that there is some apprehension regarding what might be construed as sub - standard housing. Commissioner Unger explained that it's better than a tent underneath a bridge. It all depends on where you want to draw the line. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, October 26, 2009 Page 2 of 3 Pages Commissioner Luke said that land use is all about precedence. This would be better in the cities and not in the counties, due to availability of waste disposal issues. If these are offered to the homeless, who else should be entitled to them. A city commercial zone would be best. Temporary structures may not meet minimum requirements. Mr. Kanner said that they should be located within the city limits. Perhaps out of the 160, let 40 churches take them. This would put people close to infrastructure and transportation systems. Nick Lelack noted that only the urban unincorporated areas would fit, as there is a lack of services in the other areas. A meeting of the cities and counties should happen to talk about this. Once the units are there, it will be impossible to get them out, but it may be a good opportunity for this kind of thing. Chair Baney will call Linda Johnson to find out the timing and other issues. Commissioner Unger said he has asked Erik Kropp to act as a convener, not to obligate the County to carry this forward and do all the work, but just to keep things moving. He also noted that there were no representatives from Crook or Jefferson counties or the City of Prineville at the meeting. Being no further items addressed, the meeting adjourned at 10:45 a.m. DATED this 26th Day of October 2009 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. ATTEST: C l^4 tt,,L, 1?5,L44-t-/•—•_• Recording Secretary Tammy Baney, Chair Dennis R. Luke, Vice Chair Alan Unger, Commissioner Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, October 26, 2009 Page 3 of 3 Pages Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701 -1960 (541) 388 -6570 - Fax (541) 385 -3202 - www.deschutes.org BUSINESS MEETING AGENDA DESCHLTTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 10:00 A.M., MONDAY, OCTOBER 26, 2009 Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St., Bend 1. CITIZEN INPUT This is the time provided for individuals wishing to address the Board, at the Board's discretion, regarding issues that are not already on the agenda. Citizens who wish to speak should sign up prior to the beginning of the meeting on the sign -up cards provided. Please use the microphone and also state your name and address at the time the Board calls on you to speak. PLEASE NOTE: Citizen input regarding matters that are or have been the subject of a public hearing will NOT be included in the record of that hearing. 2. CONTINUATION of a Public Hearing on Ordinance No. 2009 -023, a Text Amendment regarding the Sign Ordinance — Cynthia Smidt, Community Development 3. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA Deschutes County meeting locations are wheelchair accessible. Deschutes County provides reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities. For deaf, hearing impaired or speech disabled, dial 7 -1 -1 to access the state transfer relay service for TTY. Please call (541) 388 -6571 regarding alternative formats or for further information. FUTURE MEETINGS: (Please note: Meeting dates and times are subject to change. All meetings take place in the Board of Commissioners' meeting rooms at 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, unless otherwise indicated. If you have questions regarding a meeting, please call 388 - 6572.) Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, October 26, 2005 Page 1 of 4 Pages Monday October 26 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s) Wednesday October 28 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s) Monday, November 2 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s) 3:30 p.m. Regular Meeting of LPSCC (Local Public Safety Coordinating Council) Wednesday, November 4 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s) Monday, November 9 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 12 noon Regular Meeting with Department Directors 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s) Wednesday, November 11 Most County Offices will be closed to observe Veterans' Day. Thursday, November 10 7:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with the City of Redmond Council — Redmond City Hall 3:00 p.m. COACT Meeting, Redmond November 15 through 20 Annual Association of Oregon Counties' Conference — Portland Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, October 26, 20('9 Page 2 of 4 Pages Thursday, November 26 Most County Offices will be closed to observe Thanksgiving Friday, November 27 Most County Offices will be closed to observe Thanksgiving (unpaid day ofj) Monday, November 30 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s) Wednesday, December 2 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s) Thursday, December 3 8:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with Road Department 9:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with Solid Waste 10:00 a.m. Regular Update with District Attorney 11:00 a.m. Regular Update with Community Development 12:00 noon Meeting of Full Audit Committee Monday, December 7 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s) 3:30 p.m. Regular Meeting of LPSCC (Local Public Safety Coordinating Council) Wednesday,December 9 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s) Thursday, December 10 11:00 a.m. Regular Update with Health and Human Services Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, October 26, 200' ) Page 3 of 4 Pages Wednesday, December 16 2:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s) — Please note later time! Thursday, December 17 10:00 a.m. Regular Update with Community Justice Thursday, December 24 Most County Offices will be closed to observe Christmas (unpaid day ofJ) Friday, December 25 Most County Offices will be closed to observe Christmas Thursday, December 31 Most County Offices will be closed to observe New Years (unpaid day of) Friday, January 1 Most County Offices will be closed to observe New Years Deschutes County meeting locations are wheelchair accessible. Deschutes County provides reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities. For deaf, hearing impaired or speech disabled, dial 7 -1 -1 to access the state transfer relay service for TTY. Please call (541) 388 -6571 regarding alternative formats or for further information. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, October 26, 20( 9 Page 4 of 4 Pages ` ' Community Development Department Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Health Division 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend Oregon 97701 -1925 (541)388 -6575 FAX (541)38'5 -1764 http : / /www.co.deschutes.or.lis /cdd/ MEMORANDUM TO: Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners FROM: Cynthia Smidt, Associate Planner DATE: October 20, 2009 MEETING DATE: October 26, 2009 SUBJECT: Continued Public Hearing for Text Amendment TA- 08 -12, Deschutes County Code, Sign Ordinance The Deschutes County Board of Commissioners (Board) held a public hearing on September 28, 2009, at the Deschutes Services Center. At the September 28 hearing, there was consensus among the Commissioners that comments from impacted agencies, including but not limited to. City of La Pine and Oregon Department of Transportation, should be obtained. During ora testimony at the public hearing, representatives of Carlson Signs, a local sign company, and the Central Oregon Association of Realtors both requested additional time to submit writter comments into the record. Furthermore, the Board requested the Planning Commission receive and review the amendments as proposed after the above listed comments have been submitted The Board agreed to keep the written record open and continue the hearing to October 26, 2009 This time allows for the submission of additional comments and for staff to revise the proposes amendments based on those comments. RECOMMENDATIONS & ANALYSIS As indicated above, the Planning Division staff requested additional comments from the City of La Pine and associated Planning Commission, Deschutes County Planning Commission, Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), Carlson Sign Company, and the Central Oregon Association of Realtors (COAR). City of La Pine Planning Commission. During the October 8, 2009 joint meeting with the City of La Pine Planning Commission anti County Planning Commission, Nick Lelack presented the text amendment as proposed. At thi; meeting, the City of La Pine requested that their comments be delayed until they are able to review any comments submitted by ODOT. Comments from ODOT will be submitted to tht; Planning Division by the end of the day on Monday, October 19. After review of ODOT' comments, the City of La Pine's Planning Commission will discuss and make a recommendatio 1 Quality Services Performed with Pride at their next meeting on October 21, 2009. These comments will be reviewed by staff and discussed with the Board at the October 26 continued public hearing. Deschutes County Planning Commission At the October 8 joint meeting mentioned above, the County's Planning Commission submitted comments. Initially, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the text amendment as proposed and with noted minor changes (see Staff Report dated September 14, 2009). At the October 8 meeting, the Commission recommended modifying a section of the sign ordinance that was not mentioned in public notices or notice to DLCD. From this meeting, the Planning Commission recommends changing DCC Section 15.08.110 Temporary Signs to allow for subsections A, B, D, and G to all have the same 32 square foot maximum size area. Subsections A, B, and D already allow for 32 square foot maximum. However, this proposed change would affect subsection G by increasing the allowable sign area for "farm product signs" from 16 square feet to 32 square feet. Local Business — Carlson Sign Company Kevin Wells of Carlson Sign Company testified at the September 28 public hearing. Planning Staff expects additional written comments to be submitted and available by the October 26 continued hearing. One particular comment from the September 28 hearing recommends the following to the sign ordinance. Planning staff proposes to modify DCC 15.08.130(E) by eliminating the criterion that requires a wall sign to be located only on a wall that faces a roadway providing vehicular access. Staff proposes to eliminate only the vehicular access portion of the requirement. This recommendation requires the wall sign be located on the wall that faces the roadway. However, Mr. Wells, recommends the entire subsection E be removed from the code because building orientation does not always face the roadway, if a roadway exists. This change would also allow for self - regulation and signs will be placed where businesses believe it will be located to the best interest of the business. Staff finds Mr. Wells's recommendation logical and suggests the Board consider the modification further. Central Oregon Association of Realtors Central Oregon Association of Realtors submitted comments on October 12, 2009. After review, COAR members expressed support of the proposed amendments. Oregon Department of Transportation Oregon Department of Transportation submitted comments on October 14, 2009. The ODOT staff reviewed the proposal and stated that the recommended amendments were "good clarification" and that they had no further comments. Planning Division Aside from the recommendations presented above, staff recommends further changes to the proposal as presented by staff on September 28, 2009. As indicated by the Planning Commission and the Board, allowing large menu boards for drive -thru food service should be differentiated between large -scale restaurants and smaller drive -thru coffee huts. A mair determining factor between fast -food restaurants, such as McDonalds and Taco Bell, and a smal drive -thru coffee huts, is mobility. Small coffee huts are reviewed and approved by various: departments as a mobile food unit. Staff recommends differentiating between the two types by BOCC Staff Memo TA -08 -12 Page 2 at their next meeting on October 21, 2009. These comments will be reviewed by staff and discussed with the Board at the October 26 continued public hearing. Deschutes County Planning Commission At the October 8 joint meeting mentioned above, the County's Planning Commission submittec:: comments. Initially, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the text amendment at proposed and with noted minor changes (see Staff Report dated September 14, 2009). At th( October 8 meeting, the Commission recommended modifying a section of the sign ordinance tha was not mentioned in public notices or notice to DLCD. From this meeting, the Planninc. Commission recommends changing DCC Section 15.08.110 Temporary Signs to allow for subsections A, B, D, and G to all have the same 32 square foot maximum size area. SubsectionE A, B, and D already allow for 32 square foot maximum. However, this proposed change would affect subsection G by increasing the allowable sign area for "farm product signs" from 16 square feet to 32 square feet. Local Business — Carlson Sign Company Kevin Wells of Carlson Sign Company testified at the September 28 public hearing. Planning Staff expects additional written comments to be submitted and available by the October 26 continued hearing. One particular comment from the September 28 hearing recommends the following to the sign ordinance. Planning staff proposes to modify DCC 15.08.130(E) by eliminating the criterion that requires a wall sign to be located only on a wall that faces a roadway providing vehicular access. Staff proposes to eliminate only the vehicular access portion of the requirement. This recommendation requires the wall sign be located on the wall that faces the roadway. However, Mr. Wells, recommends the entire subsection E be removed from the code because building orientation does not always face the roadway, if a roadway exists. This change would also allow for self - regulation and signs will be placed where businesses believe it will be located to the best interest of the business. Staff finds Mr. Wells's recommendation logical and suggests the Board consider the modification further. Central Oregon Association of Realtors Central Oregon Association of Realtors submitted comments on October 12, 2009. After review, COAR members expressed support of the proposed amendments. Oregon Department of Transportation Oregon Department of Transportation submitted comments on October 14, 2009. The ODOT staff reviewed the proposal and stated that the recommended amendments were "good clarification" and that they had no further comments. Planning Division Aside from the recommendations presented above, staff recommends further changes to the proposal as presented by staff on September 28, 2009. As indicated by the Planning Commission and the Board, allowing large menu boards for drive -thru food service should be differentiated between large -scale restaurants and smaller drive -thru coffee huts. A main determining factor between fast -food restaurants, such as McDonalds and Taco Bell, and a small drive -thru coffee huts, is mobility. Small coffee huts are reviewed and approved by various departments as a mobile food unit. Staff recommends differentiating between the two types by BOCC Staff Memo TA -08 -12 Page 2 allowing a menu board for "non- mobile food establishments" as defined in OAR 333 - 150 -000. Thus, the revised language would go as follows: Motor Vehicle Service Entrance or Drive -up Window Signs. A motor vehicle service entrance or a drive -up window may have one ground- mounted sign not to exceed 12 square feet in area. Notwithstanding the proceeding, another ground- mounted sign may be allowed subject to DCC 15.08.150, provided the sign is a menu board for drive -up window service of a non - mobile food establishment as defined in OAR 333. As indicated at the September 28, 2009 public hearing, Planning staff re- evaluated subsections 15.08.280(A) and (B), Unincorporated Community Zones section. The two subsections differentiate between commercial businesses with street frontage providing vehicular access to an arterial (highway) roadway and those with frontage but no direct vehicular access. Initially, staff recommended compressing the two -tier standard into one. However, this change may lead to some unintended effects. Staff recommends a revised two -tier standard. This change goes as follows. A. For retail businesses or service establishments with a street frontage on a roadway designated as an arterial on the County Roadway Network Plan, the requirements of DCC 15.08.240 through 15.08.270 shall apply. B. For those retail businesses or service establishments without street frontage on a roadway designated as an arterial on the County Roadway Network Plan, the requirements of DCC 15.08.230 shall apply. The Planning Commission requested updating the "Uniform Building Code" reference as used it the county sign ordinance. Staff recommended to the Board that "Uniform Building Code" be replaced with the current title of "Oregon Structural Specialty Code." However, to avoic: amendments to the sign ordinance in the future, the Board recommends providing a more genera term. Based on this recommendation, staff has modified all references to the "Uniform Buildinc: Code" to "state adopted building code." Furthermore, staff removed the definition of "Uniforrr Building Code" completely (earlier version of this was revised to Oregon Structural Specialty Code specifications). Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners continue the Public Hearing, review written testimony, discuss, and decide on what option for the proposed text amendment. Attachments: 1. Ordinance 2009 -023 and Exhibits BOCC Staff Memo TA -08 -12 Page 3 CITY OF LA PINE P.O. BOX 3055 LA PINE, OR 97739 (541) 536 -1432 October 22, 2009 To: Deschutes County Planning Commission cc: Nick LeLack Cynthia Smidt From: La Pine Planning Commission RE: Proposed Text Amendment to Deschutes County Sign Code (File # TA- 08 -12) Dear Commissioners: After reviewing documents presented to the La Pine Planning Commission, our opinion is: The sign ordinances within the La Pine City limits will need to be addressed in an extended fashion once our Comprehensive Plan is approved and we begin to put our zoning laws and implementing ordinances in place. At that time we will need to decide whether or not we would want to make any changes to the existing code as it may or may not be applicable to La Pine in the future. In the meantime, with regard to the proposal before you, we did not find any portion of the amendments that we had concerns about and believe you have taken a common sense approach to updating the ordinance language. We support the changes as proposed. Most Sincerely, John Thomas Chair La Pine Planning Commission Community Development Department Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Healtl Division 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend Oregon 977(1-1925 (541)388 -6575 FAX (541)3f >5 -1764 http: / /www.co.deschutes.or. us /cdd/ STAFF REPORT TO: Deschutes Board of County Commission FROM: Cynthia Smidt, Associate Planner DATE: September 14, 2009 PUBLIC HEARING: September 28, 2009 SUBJECT: Text Amendment TA- 08 -12, Deschutes County Code, Sign Ordinance. The Deschutes Board of County Commissioners will hold a public hearing on September 28, 2009 at the Deschutes Services Center, starting at 10:00 p.m. The Commissioners will consider a Planning Division initiated text amendment for the Deschutes County Code (DCC), Sign Ordinance. In particular, DCC Sections 15.08.130 Wall Signs, 15.08.140 Freestanding Signs, 15.08.220 Resort Facilities and Destination Resorts, 15.08.250 Businesses Not Classified in a Shopping Center or Business Complex, 15.08.260 Shopping Center Complexes, 15.08.280 Unincorporated Community Zones, and 15.08.290 Industrial Zones, among others of the County Sign Ordinance. A work session will be held on September 23, 2009 to present the proposed amendment and answer the Board's questions. The purpose of this public hearing is to listen to public testimony and consider the proposed text, or direct staff to make changes and approve the text amendment. BACKGROUND Planning Division staff initiated the text amendment that proposes to change existing text and add new text to the Deschutes County Code Sign Ordinance to allow for updating, clarifying, and addressing signage issues identified by staff through the application of the code. This text amendment consists of improving signage capabilities for properties regardless of vehicular access to a designated arterial roadway, allowing additional signage for fast food restaurant menu boards, and miscellaneous changes to the sign ordinances that will update and /or clarify permitted signage. This text amendment was initiated by staff based on historical records of requested variances related directly to specific provisions of the sign ordinance and because the code has become outdated. Since 1995, of the approximate 14 sign variances processed in CDD, 11 of them were directly related to the restrictive provisions set by Section 15.08.280 (or Quality Services Performed with Pride earlier versions of this section) and its cumulative effects.' In several, these variances reflect changes to access requirements onto state highways for commercially zoned properties. PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT This proposed text amendment was staff initiated. The amendments to the sign ordinance are outlined in the attached exhibit. The amendment is shown as underlined for new language and shown as strikethrough for deleted language. ANALYSIS Section 15.08.280, Unincorporated Community Zones The sign ordinance was adopted on April 29, 1981. At that time, the provisions were referred to as Section 1.180, Signs Permitted in Rural Service Centers. This section evolved into the current day section of 15.08.280; however, the text has changed very little from its initial adoption in 1981. Section 15.08.280 applies to all signs within unincorporated community zones, which includes rural communities, rural service centers, resort communities, and urban unincorporated communities. Subsections 15.08.280(A) and (B), the main area of focus with this text amendment, differentiates between commercial businesses with street frontage providing vehicular access to an arterial (highway) roadway and those with frontage but no direct vehicular access. These provisions allow larger signs and more signage for properties with frontage and access to the highway than is allowed for property without direct highway access. Subsection (B) refers businesses without direct arterial access to DCC 15.08.230 which in turn limits signage in size, location, and quantity. As indicated previously, the Deschutes County Sign Ordinance was adopted in 1981. The provisions that linked maximum sign area to street frontage and access to an arterial roadway (highway) were adopted at the same time. The reason for this is not clear; however, it may have been assumed that commercially zoned properties with highway frontage would have direct access to the roadway. Possibly, in 1981 the existence of such access was synonymous with commercial zoning or had some other significance. Signs are an expected and necessary component of commercial development. Commercial signs must be readily visible when adjacent to high traffic, higher speed roads to be effective. Deschutes County Code recognizes the need for larger, more noticeable signs along designated arterial roads as DCC 15.08.280(A) permits. Unfortunately, when the sign code was written in 1981, it may have been assumed that such commercially zoned and located properties would have direct access to the arterial road. Subsequently, Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) changed their access standards onto our local state highways, in some cases removing old accesses. In any case, new access onto the highway is extremely difficult now. Because access standards have changed, staff recommends corrective action to simplify the code by eliminating the division based on access to an arterial roadway. Furthermore, based on the application of the sign code, the result is a variance request for additional sections of the code. These additional sections of code include 15.08.130 Wall Signs, 15.08.140 Freestanding Signs, and 15.08.290 Industrial Zones. Staff recommends 1 Prior to 1995, a majority of sign variances requested involved properties in and around the City of Bend with little or no variance requests relating to the earlier versions of section 15.08.280. Staff Report TA -08 -12 Page 2 further simplification in these sections to coincide with the changes made in 15.08.280 and thus reducing the need for future variances. Fast Food Restaurant Menu Boards. Sign Ordinance Sections 15.08.250 Businesses Not Classified in a Shopping Center or Business Complex and 15.08.260 Shopping Center Complexes, limit drive -thru menu boards to 12 square feet in size. The 12 square foot drive -thru window sign size may have been standard in the 1980's; however, today's menu boards list more food items then their predecessors. Current research of numerous fast food restaurants show drive -thru menu boards ranging in size from 32 to 44 square feet.2 County records show a sign variance in 1995 (see file no. V9517) indicating that menu boards were increasing in size 14 years ago. Staff recommends allowing for an additional ground- mounted sign for fast food restaurants with a drive -thru food service. Initially staff recommended changing the Drive -up Window Sign standards from 12 square feet to 45 square feet. After further discussions with a representative from a large fast food restaurant chain, the Drive -up Window Sign standard is for promotional signage at the pay and /or pick -up window or is for smaller menu boards located at the window (e.g. drive -thru coffee huts). Staff concurs, and based on review of the criteria in the sign ordinance, staff determined that a fast -food restaurant should be allowed an additional ground- mounted sign for a menu board without changing the Drive -up Window Sign standard. This change will allow such businesses to be in alignment with current menu board signage. Currently, the sign ordinance limits businesses to one freestanding or one ground- mounted sign (see DCC 15.08.250(C) and 15.08.260(C)). Staff recommends allowing for the additional ground- mounted sign in these sections of the sign ordinance. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed text amendment with a minor change to the menu board proposal. The issue revolves around how to differentiate the size of a fast food restaurant. A fast food restaurant could be interpreted as small or large, a McDonalds serving burgers and fries or a small coffee hut serving hot drinks and baked goods. The Planning Commission believes that the menu board recommended in the text amendment should be permitted only if the restaurant is a large -scale fast food restaurant such as a McDonalds, Taco Bell, or Carl's Junior. However, staff believes that this could be difficult or impossible for staff to administer. Additional Changes to Sign Ordinance This text amendment incorporates several changes in the sign ordinance by updating and clarifying various sign code standards. One section of the sign ordinance that requires a minor change is in Section 15.08.220 Resort Facilities and Destination Resorts. In subsection (A), the second sentence speaks of a second monument sign permitted. However, staff believes the sentence is confusing. After review of Ordinance 98 -061, staff believes that the intention was to permit a second entry sign, which must be a monument sign considering that the first entry sign is also a monument sign. Ordinance 98 -061 addressed this issue in this section of the sign code and in Section 15.08.160 Monument Signs. Staff recommends rewording the sentence for clarification to the reader. 2 Fast food restaurants in Bend were reviewed a party of interest, Larry Kimmel, and include McDonalds, Arby's, Carl's Junior, Taco Bell, Wendy's and Sonic. Furthermore, a representative of McDonalds contributed official menu board dimensions used worldwide. Staff Report TA -08 -12 Pag( 3 The Rural Commercial zone is not a zone listed in the county sign ordinance. Since 2000, staff has processed a few sign permits for businesses in the Rural Commercial zone. Two of the permits were reviewed in Unincorporated Community Zones, Section 15.08.280 and another permit was reviewed in Restricted Commercial Zones, Section 15.08.230. The Unincorporated Community Zones of Section 15.08.280 include unincorporated communities, rural communities, rural service centers, and resort communities. Staff believes the Rural Commercial zone best fits in this section. By including this zone to the list of other zones allows for clarification of the sign ordinance to staff and the public. The Planning Commission requested updating the "Uniform Building Code" reference as used in the county sign ordinance. The Building Safety Division indicated that "Uniform Building Code" should be replaced with the current title of "Oregon Structural Specialty Code." Furthermore, Building Safety Division and Planning Division staffs were unfamiliar with a Uniform Sign Code and have no records of such code. Staff recommends replacing the building code reference and removing reference to specific chapters in the building code. Staff also recommends deleting reference to the Uniform Sign Code, which is only found in the definition section of the sign ordinance. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At the public hearing on August 27, 2009, the Planning Commission public hearing, testimony was heard, alternative text were presented, and the Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed text amendment with minor changes, as indicated in this report, to the draft text amendment. The Planning Commission made another recommendation regarding the sign ordinance that is not reflected in this text amendment. Through this recommendation, the Commission emphasizes to the County Commissioners the need to revise the sign ordinance in its entirety. The recommendation encourages a complete sign ordinance update be included in the Planning Division's work plan. REVIEW CRITERIA The proposed amendment revises Deschutes County Code, Title 15, by changing existing text and adds new text to the Deschutes County Code in order to improve signage throughout the county. Deschutes County lacks specific criteria in DCC Titles 15 or 23 for reviewing a legislative text amendment. Therefore, the County must determine that the proposed Title 15 text amendments are consistent with state statute, and other provisions of the County's Comprehensive Plan. The parameters for evaluating these text amendments are based on whether there are adequate factual findings that demonstrate this consistency. Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 23 does not specifically address signs. However, it contains policies addressing economic development, as well as, specific commercial and industrial development policies for rural communities within the county. The plan includes policies to diversify and improve economic development in the county. Design standards for new commercial and industrial development encourage compatibility with the rural character of the community and surrounding rural area. The plan advocates enhancing and maintaining existing commercial and industrial areas in the county. Staff notes that signage is an expected and necessary component for commercial and industrial Staff Report TA -08 -12 Pac a 4 development. Under various sections of rural communities, the restriction of highway access of commercial and /or industrial lands is emphasized. However, regarding the proposed changes to DCC 15.08.280, the sign ordinance contradicts the policy because it penalizes commercial and industrial businesses if they do not have access to a highway. Staff believes the proposed amendments to the sign ordinance would be consistent with the County's goals and policies for economic development and those directly related rural communities (for example, Tumalo, Terrebonne, and La Pine). RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners; 1. Open the Public Hearing, listen to public testimony, discuss, and approve the text amendments. Attachments: 1. Ordinance 2009 -023 and Exhibits Staff Report TA -08 -12 Pa 3e 5