City makes changes to laws governing signs

  • Bill Sheets<br>Edmonds Enterprise editor
  • Tuesday, February 26, 2008 5:51am

EDMONDS ­ The signs of change move slowly in downtown Edmonds.

The City Council on June 17 approved some minor changes to the city code that will add some restrictions to the type of signs allowed in the downtown area. The changes are also aimed at streamlining the approval process for most signs by folding design review into the permit process rather than having it go through the Architectural Design Board. A third part of the measure approved 4-1 by the Council limits real-estate “directional” signs to one per intersection and requires they be removed within seven days after the sale of the home, and also calls for clearer definition regarding the various types of real-estate signs.

“It should amount to a much more streamlined permitting process, much less frustration for business owners,” city planning manager Rob Chave told the City Council.

In downtown Edmonds, new signs atop poles and new electronic, “box cabinet” signs will be prohibited. But the Council also voted not to take any enforcement action against existing signs that do not conform to the new rule. This would not, however, rule out enforcement action in the future should the city overhaul its sign ordinance completely, as has been suggested, Chave said.

Only if the property owner or business owner does a major overhaul of the sign, or the property undergoes a major change in use from, for example, retail to office, would the exemption not apply, Chave said. Simply changing the name of a business on a sign within its existing structure would not be a problem, he said.

The number of businesses who have these types of signs in the downtown area is pretty low percentage wise, Chave said. A quick, “windshield” survey of businesses on Fifth and Main showed that of 200 signs at 184 businesses, 19 signs were box cabinets ­ about 9-and-a-half percent ­ and 11 were pole signs, about 5-and-a-half percent, he said.

Citizen Roger Hertrich, citing the effects of large, lit signs on adjacent single-family homes, asked why the same new rules regarding pole signs and box cabinet signs could not apply to neighborhood business zones as well.

“If it’s not lit, it’s not really a problem, but if it’s lit, that’s when the problems occur,” he said.

Chave said the problem would be in applying the standard to an area such as Westgate, which is listed as a neighborhood business zone but has several strip malls.

Council member Jeff Wilson asked whether some standards could be applied to limit the amount of light put out by signs in neighborhood business zones.

“There are general code restrictions about that but it’s probably something we’d have to investigate more as we develop another set of sign regulations,” Chave said.

Council member Lora Petso said she was concerned about the downtown businesses that would potentially be labeled as non-conforming under the new rules. She suggested that signs that fit the new rules be allowed to go through the quick, basic permit process and any others be sent through a more involved review rather than being prohibited outright.

“Let’s not make it prohibited, let’s just say if you’re going to try to do that you don’t get our streamlined process. Then we can streamline it for everybody else,” Petso said. “If we do that, we don’t have to make anybody’s sign non-conforming.”

Wilson, who worked for several years as a planner for the city, said “that approach would be a substantive change and the perfect time to deal with that is when we look at the sign code as a whole.” He said he believes it will be difficult to get unanimity on what are good looking signs and what should be streamlined and slam dunk and not.

“I don’t think it’s as easy as it will be made out to be,” Wilson said. This change, he said, is an attempt to streamline the process “without trying to open up an incredibly difficult can of worms that will happen as we look at the entire code,” adding that it will take “a lot of time and effort and process” to try and reach consensus.

“It will be very difficult,” Wilson said.

Petso cast the lone “no” vote against the changes as proposed.

Talk to us

> Give us your news tips.

> Send us a letter to the editor.

> More Herald contact information.

Support local journalism

If you value local news, make a gift now to support the trusted journalism you get in The Daily Herald. Donations processed in this system are not tax deductible.