HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 7.3 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-