Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7.3 Extension Amortization Period for Signs CITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: December 23, 1991 SUBJECT: Extension of Amortization Period for Signs Identified on the Nonconforming Sign Summary List REPORT PREPARED BY: Ralph Kachadourian, Assistant Planner/Zoning (� Investigator RECOMMENDATION: ')�' Utilize the existing Sign Ordinance DIR provisions for compliance of the non- Rsigns or provide Staff direction DESCRIPTION: Background At the City Council meeting of October 28, 1991, the Council, on a majority vote, decided to allow for an extension of the amortization period for the existing nonconforming signs identified by the Nonconforming Sign Summary List. This decision was a result of the recommendation by Staff and the City Attorney that the length of an extension be based on the current market value of signs rather than an across-the-board extension date. Analysis Staff has been researching the criteria and process for extending the amortization period, and issues relating to the current market value of the signs, the length of time for the extension and the follow-up enforcement action after expiration of the extension period. Staff believes that the current market value of a nonconforming sign should be based on the sign' s initial construction cost and depreciation over time. For example, a sign constructed 20 years ago for $10, 000 should have a current market value of less than $10,000 . Staff has contacted several sign companies and a real property appraiser to inquire as to how they determine the current market value for existing signs . The sign companies and real property appraiser use provisions in State law that were adopted after the City' s Sign Ordinance was adopted and which are not applicable to the City' s Sign Ordinance. State law defines the fair market value of a sign to consist of : 1) the cost to replace the sign, 2 ) the cost of sign removal, and 3 ) the cost to repair any property damage. The sign companies charge by the square foot or by the cost of each individual letter or by the specific job required. They also indicated that sign replacement costs tend to increase each year due to their overhead and expenses . For example, using replacement cost a ITEM NO. COPIES TO: General/Agenda File Project Planner Senior Planner TY 'CLERK FILE �, 0 d 3 O sign constructed 20 years ago for $10, 000 would have a current replacement cost much higher than $10, 000 . The sign companies advised Staff that the prior value of an existing sign could possibly be determined from the valuation figures indicated by the building permits on file. However, this would not reflect the current sign replacement costs . A more accurate determination of the current market value could be made by obtaining three different estimates from sign companies for each of the nonconforming signs identified on the list. The following options are available regarding the expiration of the time extensions for the nonconforming signs : Option #1 ; Utilizing the Existing Sign Ordinance With this option, no amendment to the sign ordinance would be required and no additional extensions would be given. Most of the nonconforming signs should be brought into compliance with the existing sign ordinance provisions established in the Zoning Ordinance, through Site Development Review, Conditional Use Permit, Variance and Administrative Conditional Use Permit approval processes . The following is the number of nonconforming sign locations indicated on the Summary List which could be brought into conformance with the Sign Ordinance provisions : - Forty-two ( 42 ) sign locations could apply for Site Development Review approval . - One ( 1 ) could apply for Conditional Use Permit approval . - Two ( 2 ) could apply for a Variance. - Ten ( 10 ) could apply for a combination of either a Site Development Review, Conditional Use Permit, Variance, or an Administrative Conditional Use Permit approval . Two ( 2 ) signs require removal since they are illegal . A total of 43 ( 75%) of the aforementioned sign locations would typically be granted Site Development Review and Conditional Use Permit approval by the Planning Director or the Planning Commission. The 12 ( 21%) sign locations that involve a Variance or a combination of permits would need case by case findings and may or may not be approved. The 2 (4%) sign locations with illegal signs would require removal of the illegal signs, however, other conforming signs would be allowed. Staff recommends this option to bring the nonconforming sign locations into compliance. This option requires no action by the City Council . -2- Option #2 ; Grant an Across-The-Board Extension Period An across-the-board extension could be granted if an amendment to the Sign Ordinance is approved. Granting this type of extension could be viewed as being unfair to those sign owners/property owners who have already complied with the ordinance. Also, this option might encourage the nonconforming sign owners/property owners to again come back to the Council at the end of the extension period and request additional time extensions . Staff does not recommend this option. Option #3; Extend Amortization Period Based on the Current Market Value This option would require an amendment to the Sign Ordinance. Staff has determined that this option would be impractical from a time and expense standpoint since either the City would hire the sign companies to provide three ( 3) market value estimates for all fifty- five ( 55) nonconforming sign locations, or the individual sign owners would submit the three ( 3) market value estimates at the time of a request for an extension. Also, Staff has not been able to find appraisers willing to use the initial construction cost and depreciation method to determine the current market value for the nonconforming signs . Staff does not recommend this option. Regardless of which of the options the City Council decides to choose or give direction on, the enforcement procedures established in the Sign Ordinance would not be changed and would involve nuisance abatement proceedings upon expiration of the existing or any newly granted extension period. Staff will provide notification and reminder letters to the sign owners/property owners in two month increments prior to the expiration date to allow adequate time for the signs to be brought into compliance. Staff recommends Option #1 utilizing the existing Sign Ordinance provisions established in the Zoning Ordinance for compliance of the nonconforming signs . -3-