Planning Comm MINS 11-02-2011
K:\Planning Commission\2011\Meeting Summary 11-02-11.doc
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
PLANNING COMMISSION
November 2, 2011 City Hall
7:00 p.m. Council Chambers
MEETING MINUTES
Commissioners present: Merle Pfeifer, Hope Elder, Tim O’Neil, Lawson Bronson, and Sarady Long.
Commissioners absent: Tom Medhurst and Wayne Carlson (both excused). Staff present: Planning
Manager Isaac Conlen, Contract Planner Jim Harris, Assistant City Attorney Peter Beckwith, and
Administrative Assistant II Tina Piety.
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Pfeifer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of October 19, 2011, were approved as presented.
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Planning Manager Conlen announced that the Shoreline Master Program has received final approval from
the City Council. It now goes to the state for final approval.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
PUBLIC HEARING – High Profile & Wall Mounted Banner Signs in Non-Residential Zoning Districts
Contract Planner Harris delivered the staff report. The proposed amendments are to three sections of the
sign regulations pertaining to non-residential zoning districts: (1) allow a third high profile pylon or pole
sign for the largest commercial sites; (2) modify the definition of banner; and (3) allow a wall mounted
banner as an approved sign type for all businesses in non-residential zones.
The rational for the proposed amendments are: they are business friendly code amendments; the high
profile sign code amendment would allow five to seven of the largest retail centers (those with most
frontage) and a large number of tenants to have a third pylon or pole sign for center and tenant
identification; and they allow a wall mounted banner, which would be a potentially less costly alternative
for any size business in any non-residential zoning district.
The meeting was opened for public comment.
Cynthia Stanley Lee, The Commons General Manager – She commented that in order to attract
national retailers, The Commons needs to show that it has good sign exposure. She supports the
proposed amendments because they will help.
Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 November 2, 2011
K:\Planning Commission\2011\Meeting Summary 11-02-11.doc
Public comment was closed.
Commissioner Elder asked what, or who, brought forth the proposed amendments. Planning Manager
Conlen explained that The Commons brought forth the issue on the high profile signs due to their new
tenants and the need for additional signage. The banner sign issue was brought forth by a small business
that needs a more cost effective sign. One reason Commissioner Elder asked the question is because she
has requested a code amendment to allow banners over streets, but has not heard anything about it.
Planning Manager Conlen replied that staff is aware of the request, but the City Council has not made it a
priority on the Planning Commission’s Work Program.
Discussion was held regarding the required frontage footage. Under the current code, an eligible site may
have one high profile pylon or pole sign if it has a minimum of 250 feet of frontage on one right-of-way.
If the site has a minimum of 750 feet of frontage on one right-of-way, they may have two high profile
pylon or pole signs. There must be 250 feet of separation between the signs. The proposed amendments
would allow the site to have a third high profile pylon or pole sign with 2000 feet of frontage on all
rights-of way. Only two signs may be placed on a single right-of-way, the third must be placed on a
second right-of-way. For example, The Commons could have two high profile pylon or pole signs along
320th Street and one along Pacific Highway South. In addition, there must be 250 feet of separation
between the three signs. Commissioner O’Neil asked if three signs will be adequate for The Commons
needs. Ms. Stanley-Lee replied that three signs will meet their needs.
Chair Pfeifer commented that a picture of a banner sign would help him make a decision. He asked how
the banner signs will be affixed to the building. Will they be required to have a frame? Planning Manager
Conlen replied that the proposed amendments say the banner sign must be firmly affixed to the building;
the wind should not be able to move it. He envisions this will be done with rivets. They will not be
required to have a frame. Chair Pfeifer is concerned that if banner signs are not required to be in a frame,
they will soon be in poor condition and unsightly. Planning Manager Conlen stated that the proposed
amendment states the sign must be maintained in good repair. Commissioner Long stated that he was also
concerned about banner signs being maintained, but after conversations with staff, he concluded that his
concerns are addressed and this amendment would give small businesses an affordable choice for signage.
Commissioner Elder moved (and it was seconded) to recommend approval of the proposed code
amendments as proposed. The motion carried. The public hearing was closed.
ADDITIONAL BUSINESS
The next meeting will be December 7th and will be a continuation of the temporary uses proposed code
amendments public hearing.
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 7:40 p.m.