HomeMy WebLinkAboutHRDC and Chandler Communications Sign Permit with Certificate of Appropriateness Public Hearing_12Page 1 of 9
Commission Memorandum
REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission
FROM: Chris Saunders, Policy and Planning Manager
Wendy Thomas, Director of Community Development
SUBJECT: Z-13093, Chandler Communications Sign Permit with Certificate of Appropriateness to place three transit shelters at three different locations with allowance for off-premise signs (Quasi-Judicial)
MEETING DATE: June 24, 2013
AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Action – Quasi-Judicial
RECOMMENDATION: Approval, with conditions, of the placement of the transit shelters after completion of needed encroachment permits and denial of the signs as submitted.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: “Having reviewed the application materials, considered public
comment, and the staff analysis, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for file
Z-13093 and move to approve the placement of the transit shelters subject to the conditions listed
in the Commission memo.”
Memo page references: conditions of approval, page 2; Off-premise review criteria, page 4; certificate of appropriateness review criteria, page 7; alternatives, page 9.
BACKGROUND:
Request: The HRDC and Chandler Communication requested the City Commission reclaim
original review authority for a proposal to place three transit shelters, incorporating off-premise advertising. The City Commission reclaimed original review authority on June 3, 2013 and scheduled June 24th for consideration of the applications.
The photo-simulations submitted with the application depict signs which are legible from the
driving lanes at a considerable distance from the shelter. The present photo-simulations are
therefore not in compliance with the applicable standards of the municipal code.
There are five existing transit shelters in Bozeman and one which has be preliminarily approved for location on Fallon. None contain signage at this time. A listing of locations, ownership, and
maintenance is provided as an attachment to this memorandum.
Application Type: Sign permit with certificate of appropriateness. No variance or deviation
request has been included with the application. Three locations are requested with the same physical structure at each location. A separate application is provided for each location. There are some variations in the site layout due based on location constraints. This is the first time this
issue has been addressed as a formal application for approval. The issue of off-premise signs in
171
Page 2 of 9
association with transit shelters was previously raised and discussed conceptually which resulted
in the text of Section 38.28.150.A.1, BMC being adopted in December 2009.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS:
1. The encroachment permit for each location shall be received from the City or State department of transportation (MDOT) as applicable before issuance of a building permit. All terms of the encroachment permit shall be maintained in force or the transit shelter shall be
removed, at the cost to the applicant.
2. All signs except the Streamline marker or the bus route and schedule shall be oriented to
the interior of the shelter.
3. An analysis of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) 2009 edition factors shall be performed for each location to determine the legibility of the sign placard to
on-coming traffic. The analysis must establish the minimum allowed text and symbol size per
the MUTCD. The methodology of the analysis shall be reviewed and acceptable to both the
Montana Department of Transportation (MDOT) and the City of Bozeman. The maximum size text and symbols on each advertisement allowed to be installed in a shelter shall be no greater than 50% of the minimum size allowed per the MUTCD. Should the MUTCD
analysis not arrive at a satisfactory conclusion for the applicant, city, or MDOT the
applicable parties may agree to engage a neutral party to determine the maximum allowed
text size. Costs resulting from a neutral party are the responsibility of the applicant.
4. The applicant shall either confirm the use of external illumination or shall restrict design of the placed signs to conform to the internal illumination limits in Design Objectives Plan,
Chapter 4, Section D, guideline 2.
5. If an established transit route locates away from an approved location the transit shelter
and any accompanying signage shall be removed by the applicant within 30 calendar days.
6. The applicant shall provide the City written verification of compliance with MDOT standards and processes prior to issuance of a building permit for placement of the transit
shelter on MDOT right-of-way.
7. Applicants are advised that the City must approve a building permit and accessibility plan
before installation of any structure or permanent installation.
8. Prior to issuance of an encroachment permit, the applicants shall agree in writing to indemnify and hold the City harmless for all claims of any kind related to the operation of the
transit shelter in a manner as required by the City Attorney and provide adequate insurance
endorsing the City, its officers and employees as additional insured on a primary non-
contributory basis in an amount and manner acceptable to the City Attorney.
9. Active service to the proposed location of the Haggerty Ln/Ellis Street shelter shall be demonstrated prior to the approval of an encroachment permit for the site.
Locations: Three sites are proposed for review at this time. See the maps below for locations
and zoning designations. All three sites are located within the public right-of-way.
N. 19th Avenue and Baxter Lane (M-1, Light Industrial zoning district), MDOT right-of-way
172
Page 3 of 9
Ellis Street and Haggerty Lane (R-4, Residential High Density zoning district), City Right-of-
way
23rd Avenue and College Street, (BP, Business Park zoning district), MDOT right-of-way
173
Page 4 of 9
CRITERIA FOR REVIEW: The City has established a set of standard for signs. These
standards apply to “…all signs and sign structures not located within a building, or within a
building and visible from the exterior …” The City does not use zoning to regulate signs
located within a building and which cannot be seen from outside the building. There are several provisions relating to off-premise signs. All include standards which address this
question of visibility from outside of the structure. These standards range from a prohibition
to specific maximum letter height of one inch for wayfinding signs (38.28.070.E.4.g, BMC)
to a more generalized “not legible from the driving lanes” (38.28.150.A.1, BMC). Different
standards are adopted to address different circumstances. The relevant sections are included in full as an attachment to this memo.
The applicable review criteria for this application are those for signs, especially off-premise
signs per Section 38.28.150, BMC and the certificate of appropriateness criteria for the
entryway overlay per Article 38.17, BMC and the Design Objectives Plan. Due to the unique
nature of this application and the commonality of issues among the three applications a separate staff report for each application was not prepared. All materials are provided to the
Commission with this memorandum.
Off-premise advertising is generally prohibited in the City of Bozeman but a limited
exception with specific performance requirements is allowed under Section 38.28.150, BMC
(see below). The exception was created in 2009. The application under review is the first formal proposal to request approval under this section.
The provisions for advertising on municipal facilities authorized by Chapter 34, Article 7 do
not apply with this application. The transit shelters proposed to be installed with this
application are not owned or operated by the City and the City will not receive any revenue
from the sale of advertizing to reduce taxpayer burdens. In order for Article 34.07, BMC to apply all the terms of that article must be met.
Text of Section 38.28.150
“Sec. 38.28.150. Billboards and other off-premises advertising.
A. Off-premises commercial advertising signs are not permitted within the city limits
except as permitted by state or federal law.
174
Page 5 of 9
1. Exception: Off-premises signs may be placed on the interior of transit shelters
reviewed and approved by the city and served by an active fixed route transit service.
Signage within a transit shelter shall not distract drivers of vehicles nor be legible from
the driving lanes.”
There are five criteria included within the transit shelter exception. All five must be satisfied for an application to be approved.
1. Interior placement – The applicant proposes to install large (approximately 24 square feet)
rectangular signs which, as shown in the application, will be oriented to the interior of the
shelters. The Streamline transit service sign is prominently displayed on the front of the shelter as an on-premise sign allowed under 38.28.060, BMC and can be allowed under the present sign permit. Streamline is the transit service the actual entity delivering service at the
site, HRDC is a coordinating agent and the HRDC logo is therefore an off-premise sign. The
large round HRDC logo must be moved to the interior. Condition 2 addresses this criterion.
2. Transit shelter approved by the City – There are three steps to this criterion. First is the zoning review which is the process now underway. Second, an encroachment permit will be needed as a follow up if the zoning approval is granted. The encroachment permit is an
administrative process handled by the Public Works Engineering Division for City of
Bozeman right-of-way on Haggerty Lane. Encroachment permits for the state right-of-way,
i.e. the College Street/S. 23rd Avenue and North 19th Avenue/Baxter Ln locations will be handled by MDOT. The encroachment permit process is the stage where insurance, site maintenance, and similar issues are detailed as conditions to the permit. Finally, a building
permit from the City of Bozeman is required for the physical installation of the transit shelter.
This step will not occur until the first two have been completed. The Department of
Community Development must approve the building permit before issuance and will verify that all required steps have been completed. Condition 1 addresses this criterion.
3. Active fixed route transit service must serve the shelter – The College Street/S. 23rd Avenue
and North 19th Avenue/Baxter Ln locations where a transit shelter is proposed are on fixed
routes served by the Streamline system as shown on their most current route map. The
Haggerty Ln/Ellis Street location is further east than the current route map shows. Prior to an encroachment permit being issued for that location transit service to the location must be demonstrated. Should a route be changed and no longer serves the location of the shelter
must be removed. Conditions 5 and 9 address this issue.
4. Not distract drivers of vehicles – The City has established a prohibition on flashing lights or
other prohibited types of signs which are considered to be distracting. These prohibitions are established in Section 38.28.030, BMC. As proposed, the signs are not of these prohibited types. Distraction is also affected by the following criterion.
5. Sign is not legible from the driving lanes – This criterion has not been met. Legible is defined
in the Merriam-Webster dictionary as “capable of being read or deciphered.” Legibility is
different from visibility which means that the item can simply be seen but not necessarily be legible. There is no dimensional standard in the code used to determine compliance with this criterion. Legibility from the driving lanes is determined by several factors including the
orientation of the structure to or way from the street, distance of the signs from the driving
lane, a viewer’s speed of travel, and the overall design of the sign.
A commonly used and accepted standard for designing for legibility of signs within a right-of-way is the Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). The MUTCD establishes standards for how big the text on stop signs or street names signs should be so
175
Page 6 of 9
that they are safely legible to the driver. In determining how large a sign must be and the
appropriate size of the text within the signs, the MUTCD takes into account the various
factors of speed, distance, required reaction times, etc., which affect legibility. For example,
the size of text for a typical street identification sign at a low speed local street intersection is six inches in height. This provides a driver the ability to see the sign, read and understand the sign, and make necessary maneuvers in a timely manner. A street with different
characteristics may have a different size text recommended.
The MUTCD is a neutral, well tested and accepted standard for sign legibility. The standards
of the MUTCD are established to ensure legibility under adverse driving conditions and reduced driver capacity. The MUTCD was used as part of the basis for a model sign code published by the Urban Design Associates titled “A Legal and Technical Exploration of On-
Premise Sign Regulation: An Evidence Based-Model Sign Code.”
Prior to final approval we recommend that to determine how large text or symbols may be
authorized on signage within a specific transit shelter the applicant should conduct a site specific MUTCD analysis. The analysis should be designed to determine the minimum size text which would be allowed if the text using the MUTCD recommended font were on a
street sign on a Conventional Road per Chapter 2D and Section 2A.13, Word Messages, of
the MUTCD.
This size of text is known to be legible outside of the transit shelter and therefore not in compliance with the adopted standard of 38.28.150.A.1, BMC. Upon establishing the minimal size text legible from the driving lanes, the text or symbols installed on a sign within
the shelter must then be less than that minimum size. The MUTCD standards are established
with a strong bias towards legibility to comply with the five principles of traffic control
devices. Two of these principles are commanding attention and providing adequate time for proper response. Therefore to ensure all signs installed within the transit shelter comply with 38.28.150, BMC, a substantial reduction in maximum text size should be established. We
recommended establishing a reduction of a fixed percentage of 50% from the minimum size
determined to be legible from a driving lane under the MUTCD’s analysis. This reduction is
determined to be reasonable since the City, to determine whether a sign is “legible” from the driving lane, must extrapolate from the MUTCD’s standards for legibility with their strong bias towards legibility. In doing so, it is reasonable to expect that a reduction of 50% will
ensure the signage is not “legible” from the driving lane even though the presence of the sign
may be seen from the driving lane.
Use of the MUTCD standards as a basis for action substantially reduces subjectivity or personal bias in determining whether a given sign is ‘legible’ as presented. The present photo-simulations submitted with the application depict signs which are legible from the
driving lanes at a considerable distance. The present photo-simulations are therefore not in
compliance with this criterion. Should the Commission so choose, they should approve the
placement of the transit shelters with a condition that the suggested MUTCD based analysis be performed to show compliance prior to installation of the shelters. This issue also is addressed in the Design Objectives Plan, Chapter 4, Section A. Condition 3 requires the
MUTCD based analysis.
The State of Montana also has requirements for the placement of signs which encroach
within a state controlled right of way. The state requirements apply to two of the requested locations; N. 19th Avenue/Baxter Lane and College Street/S 23rd Avenue. Conversation with
the manager of the program for the Department of Transportation on June 5th indicates that
they will apply the most restrictive of either the City’s or the State’s regulations. The State
176
Page 7 of 9
performs unscheduled on-site inspections to verify that compliance with the terms of any
approval is maintained. Similar to how the City interacts with state regulation of alcohol
licensing, there will be an exchange of information between agencies to coordinate the timing
of issuance of approvals. Issuance of the required encroachment permit is handled by the Butte District office of MDOT. Applicant indicates they have discussed the locations with applicable state personnel but formal applications are waiting for completion of the City’s
zoning review. Conditions 3 and 6 address this coordination.
Design Objectives Plan
The City’s Design Objectives Plan (DOP) has five chapters. Chapter 1, Neighborhood Design Guidelines, Chapter 2, Site Design Guidelines, and Chapter 5, Corridor Specific Design Guidelines, have been determined to not be applicable to the current proposal. These chapters 1,
2, and 5 are focused on larger scale site developments. The proposed transit shelters are
physically small, less than a total of 370 cubic feet and with no dimension over 9 feet. Therefore,
the criteria in these chapters are not individually addressed in this memo as they have been determined to not be applicable. Chapters 3 and 4 are applicable as the shelters meet the City’s definition of a building and are signage is proposed; as such, they are discussed below.
Chapter 3 of the Design Objectives Plan addressing Building Design:
A. Building & Topography- The building follows the general lay of the land. Placement of the
structures must be done in such a manner as to be accessible to persons with disabilities. The detailed analysis for this will be done with the building permit. With the level of detail presented at this time the sites appear accessible.
B. Building Character- This section strongly discourages standardized “franchise” architecture.
In this circumstance there is a public benefit to having a commonly recognized character for
the transit shelter to facilitate their use. Given the very small size and accessory nature of the buildings and that the colors used are relevant to the Bozeman community this criteria appears to be met. The color palette also addresses criterion J below. The design of the
shelter has a more urban rather than rural design character which is appropriate to the
depicted locations.
C. Primary Building Entrance- Entrances are oriented to the street and pedestrian access.
D. Street Level Interest- Not applicable due to the small size of the structures.
E. Building Mass & Scale- The small size and design of these structures does not present any
concerns with mass and scale as discussed in this section.
F. Roof Form- The primary roof form is rounded with ribs to provide variety as encouraged by
this section.
G. Building Materials- The primary structure material is metal and glass. Given the small size of the structure no additional materials or detailing is required.
H. Building Complex- N/A as only one structure per site is proposed.
I. Service Canopies- Not applicable to this application.
J. Color- The guidelines recommend muted earth tones with bolder colors used primarily for accent only. A minimum of 75% of the exterior walls seen from a public way shall have muted colors. The colors depicted are yellow and blue. As the majority of the sides of the
structures are glass or blue this standard appears to be met.
177
Page 8 of 9
K. Utilities & Mechanical Equipment- The municipal code and the DOP require all mechanical
equipment to be screened from view. There is an exemption for solar energy equipment. No
other mechanical equipment is proposed.
Chapter 4 of the DOP addresses Sign Design:
A. Sign Context and Position. Guideline 1 says to develop a master sign plan for the entire property; this should be used to guide individual sign decisions. The photo-simulations
submitted with the application show several different signs on the individual shelters. The
depicted signs identifying the transit service provider are in scale with the shelter. The large
HRDC logo does not appear to be in scale or to serve a purpose in identifying the role of the shelter which appears to conflict with guideline 2 which states that a sign should be part of the overall building composition.
The larger commercial advertisements as depicted do not meet the standards of Section
38.28.150. See the discussion above on the five criteria in the section. A site specific analysis
should be done to establish the maximum dimensions for text and symbols which can conform to the adopted standard. This would then provide a site specific standard which would guide the individual signs over time which would be placed at the site. This would
also provide a means of alternative compliance for Section 38.28.020 which requires a sign
permit before installation of a new sign which includes changing the text copy. If such an
alternative is not allowed then a separate and individual sign permit must be reviewed and approved for each sign in each shelter every time they change. Condition number 2 addresses this matter.
Normally a sign remains in place for a long time after being reviewed and approved. The
review criteria are focused on this type of installation. This application is different in that it is
seeking approval for a sign support structure with the intent to allow a variety of signs to be placed within the structure over time. Condition 3 requires establishment of a site specific standard which provides an alternate means of compliance to ensure signs stay in compliance
with the requirements of the municipal code instead of requiring a new sign permit with each
change of sign copy. Condition number 3 addresses this matter.
B. Sign Type. Not applicable to this application.
C. Sign Materials. The proposed transit shelter is constructed of durable materials appropriate to its function. Signs will be printed and inserted within the long term support structure. This
appears to conform to the requirements of this guideline.
D. Sign Lighting. The transit shelters propose to provide internal illumination through a solar
powered lighting system. The internal illumination for the shelter waiting area appears to conform to the City’s lighting standards. It appears that lighting is a “wash” from a mounted light integrated in the shelter rather than inside of the sign itself. Internally illuminated signs
are restricted in the color background of the sign to prevent glare and distraction to passing
drivers. The applicants will need to either confirm the external illumination or restrict design
of the placed signs to conform to the internal illumination limits in guideline 2. Condition 4 addresses this matter.
E. Sign Content – Not applicable as the sign display area being approved is off-premise to the
advertiser. See also the discussion above on sign context and the criteria for off-premise
signs in association with a transit shelter.
F. Wall Murals – Not applicable
178
Page 9 of 9
Notice and comment: No general public notice action has occurred to date and no public
comment has been received. An application of this nature does not typically require public notice
to be given. One adjacent property owner who would be particularly affected by the proposed
location at N. 19th Avenue and Baxter lane was advised of the application adjacent to them.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES: The following are related issues beyond the scope of the present
application. As shelters may be installed with or without signs the following should occur.
1) Establishment of a coordinated transit shelter management program and the City’s role in such
a program.
2) Transition of the existing shelters into a coordinated management program
ALTERNATIVES: The City Commission has the following alternative actions available. Some
action s may be acted upon in combination with others.
1. Approve the placement of the shelters with conditions as recommended by staff and require the applicant to design all signs to conform to the requirements of 38.28.150; or
2. Deny the placement of the shelters and associated signs as not in conformance with Section
38.28.150; or
3. Direct an amendment to Section 38.28.150 to be investigated for future consideration by the
City Commission.
4. Continue the review of the application to a future date and request additional information necessary to complete the review.
FISCAL EFFECTS: None identified at this time.
Attachments: Summary fact sheet
Letter requesting reclaim
Application for site at N. 19th Avenue and Baxter Lane
Application for Ellis Street and Haggerty Lane
Application for site at S. 23rd Avenue and College Street
Map of shelter locations
List of other transit shelter locations in Bozeman
Text from Sections 38.34.010, 38.28.070, and 38.28.160, BMC
Materials from MDOT regarding sign placements
Report compiled on: June 11, 2013
179
Public Comment
Support Opposed Concern
Letters: None to date
Speakers:
A
a;sa;sdkjfaskdf;askdjf;
Final Site Plan Approval
Project Description
A request to place transit shelters with sign display
areas for off-premise signs within the public right-
of- way at three locations, respectively:
1) N 19th Ave. and Baxter Ln,
2) Ellis St and Haggerty Ln, and
3) S. 23rd Ave and College Street.
Existing Zoning and Development
The three sites are respectively zoned M-1, R-O,
and BP.
Compatibility
Transit shelters themselves when property placed
are not incompatible with the use of the public
right of way for travel or use of adjacent private
properties.
Additional Comments
The applicants requested the City Commission to
reclaim this application for initial development
review. The Commission did reclaim the application
on June 3, 2013.
Placement of transit shelters within a public right-
of-way normally would be addressed through a
right-of-way encroachment permit and would be
solely an administrative review. Two shelters would
require a state encroachment permit and one
would require a city encroachment permit.
This request is unusual in that each of the transit
shelters is proposed to be used for off-premise sign
locations available for a fee. The shelters would be
owned and operated not by a public agency but by
a private firm, Chandler Communications.
Off-premise signs are generally prohibited within
the City by Section 38.28.150, BMC with a narrow
exception subject to five criteria. If all five criteria
are met, an off-premise sign may be placed in
conjunction with a transit shelter. The signs
depicted in the present proposal do not conform to
the required criteria.
Some revision and additional data is needed to
demonstrate compliance with the established
criteria. No variance or deviation has been
requested with this application.
The state has its own separate criteria for
permitting advertising in the right of way when the
right-of-way is controlled by the State as is the case
with N. 19th Avenue and College Street.
Staff Recommendation:
Approval, with conditions, of the placement of the
transit shelters after completion of needed
encroachment permits and denial of the signs as
submitted.
Recommended Motion:
“Having reviewed the application materials, considered
public comment, and the staff analysis, I hereby adopt
the findings presented in the staff report for file Z-
13093 and move to approve the placement of the
transit shelters subject to the conditions listed in the
Commission memo.”
Chandler Communications Sign/COA Z-13093
Application Summary
Sign Permit with Certificate of Appropriateness to
place three transit shelters with off-site signage.
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
FALLON ST
COLLEGE ST
KAGY BLVD
COLLEGE ST
MSU STRAND
UNION
MSU
CAMPUS
MSU HEDGES COMPLEX
DOWNTOWN TRANSFER
LAW & JUSTICE CENTER
TECH PARK
BABCOCK
GALLATIN
VALLEY MALL
CLEVELAND ST
HARRISON ST
CURTISS ST
KOCH ST
STORY ST
POSTOFFICE
PUBLICLIBRARY
PEACH ST.
BOZEMAN
HIGH SCHOOLHASTINGSCENTER
VILLARD ST
BEALL ST
LAMME ST
MUSEUM OF THE ROCKIES
BOZEMAN DEACONESSHOSPITAL
(PHARMACYENTRANCE)
MENTAL
HEALTHCAMPUS
CHERRY
S. CEDARVIEW
S. PINECREST
BABCOCK
MAIN ST
BABCOCK
TOOLE
FOUR CORNERS AND BELGRADE INSET
KOONTZ TRAILER PARK
HUFFINE LANE
THERIDGE
VALLEY COMMONS DR
BABCOCK
LAREDO DR
CASCADE
GENA CIRCLE
VILLARD ST
DURSTON RD
OAK ST
ANNIE ST
DURSTON RD
OAK ST OAK ST
TAMARACK
VAN’SIGA
WAL-MART
TSCHACHE
OAK ST
TAMARACK
SOUTH TOWNSQUARE
BUS DEPOT
ROSE ST
HEMLOCK ST FAIRGROUNDS
COLLEGE ST
PEACH ST.
KOCH ST
STORY ST
RAVALLI
DAY’S INN
ASPEN MEADOWS
FERGUSON AVERMSC
NORTH 19TH AVE INSET
WAL-MARTBRIDGER PEAKS
TOWN CENTER(AAA)N 7TH AVE.ELLIS ST
HA
G
G
E
R
T
Y
ARROWHEAD
SHEDHO
RN DRFRANK RD
HOLIDAY INN/OVERLAND EXPRESS (IN BACK LOT)
BELGRADE
MADISON AVE.
W.
M
I
S
S
O
U
L
A
GALLATIN FIELD AIRPORT
HUFFINE LANE
DIVISION
FOUR CORNERS & BELGRADE
CATTAIL
POSTOFFICE
GALLATIN CENTER(STAPLES LOT)
SOC. SEC.
BAXTER
NORTH 19TH AVE
TRANSFER POINTS ROUTES INCLUDED
BLUELINE
YELLOWLINE
REDLINE
GREENLINE
STOP BOTH WAYS
More current schedule information and updates
406 - 587 - 2434 OR streamlinebus.com Pg. One : Drop-off Only Details
DOWNTOWN
HUB MSU-STRAND
UNIONGALLATIN
VALLEY MALL
LEGEND
DIRECTION OVERLAP BUS STOP STOP BOTH WAYSDROP - OFF ONLY
BLUELINE YELLOWLINE REDLINE GREENLINE
DAYTIME SERVICE
224
Page 1 of 5
Existing and Preliminarily Approved Transit Shelters in Bozeman
Location ROW Jurisdiction Ownership Maintenance
Bridger Park, 26 E. Mendenhall St Not in Right of Way, located inside the parking
garage
City through the Parking Commission City of Bozeman
Kagy Blvd and S. 3rd Not in Right of Way, on
private land, no known easement
Private Private
Tamarack Street and N. Tracy Avenue (Senior
Center)
Not in Right of Way, on City of Bozeman land Senior Center Senior Center
N. 7th Avenue and
Tamarack St (Van’s)
Not in Right of Way,
easement on private land
City Streamline
Oak Street and N. 15th Avenue State of Montana Streamline Streamline
Fallon Street and Cottonwood Road** Not in Right of Way, easement on private land Not finalized Unknown
**Preliminarily approved as part of a site plan. No final site plan has been submitted and
approved. Anticipated to be provided by Chandler Communications.
Related off-premise code provisions within the Sign Code, Article 38.28, BMC
Sec. 38.28.010. Intent and purpose.
A. It is the intent and purpose of this article to promote the health, safety and welfare of the
residents and visitors of the city by regulating and controlling the size, location, type, quality of
materials, height, maintenance and construction of all signs and sign structures not located
within a building, or within a building and visible from the exterior for the following reasons:
1. To preserve the Bozeman area's natural scenic beauty and character as expressed in
adopted city plans and policies;
2. To contribute to inviting entrances into the city by eliminating clutter associated, in part,
with the unrestricted proliferation of signs, lights and stringed devices;
3. To encourage area beautification through creative, interrelated design of signage,
landscaping, buildings, access and parking that enhances the community's built and natural
environment;
4. To give all businesses an equal opportunity to have a sign that will help people find the
services they need;
5. To ensure that pedestrians and motorists are protected from damage or injury caused or
partly attributable to the distractions and obstructions which are caused by improperly
225
Page 2 of 5
situated signs. The city commission intends to provide a reasonable balance between the right
of an individual to identify their business and the right of the public to be protected from the
visual discord that results from the unrestricted proliferation of signs. Sections 38.16.070 and
38.17.080 establish certain exemptions, and alternative procedures utilizing design review.
The deliberations and decisions of the design review shall be directed to accomplish the
intent and purpose of this section. It is determined that the regulations contained herein are
the minimum necessary to further the interests of this chapter; and
6. To protect the public health and safety by minimizing distractions to the traveling public.
Sec. 38.28.070. Wayfinding Signage.
A. Purpose. Wayfinding signs shall serve to assist travelers in navigating the larger community
and identifying defined districts. Wayfinding signs or kiosks are not intended to serve as off-
premises advertising for individual entities.
B. Defined districts. To qualify as a district an area must have a significant commonality of
purpose, identity and shared functions serving the larger community. Designation as a district is
at the discretion of the city and shall only be granted when found to be consistent with the intent
of this article and the city's other adopted regulations, policies and plans. Approval of district
designation is the duty of the review authority who shall make written findings of the decision.
C. Wayfinding signage is intended to add to the district's "sense of place" and may include
district identification signs, directory signs to designate shared or common spaces such as
parking facilities, parks, trails and open space. It may also include pedestrian-scale informational
kiosks to announce district events and/or to list a directory that corresponds with a map presented
in the kiosk. Wayfinding signs shall not advertise specific businesses or otherwise constitute off-
premises signs. Wayfinding signage is permitted within districts only after approval of a
comprehensive signage plan for the wayfinding signs.
D. Submittal of a comprehensive signage plan for wayfinding must be made by a single
individual or entity legally authorized to represent the area within the plan and with the consent
of relevant governing authority. In addition to the requirements of section 38.28.180, a
comprehensive signage plan for wayfinding must:
1. Include a description of the installation and maintenance program for the signs including,
but not limited to, who is responsible for installation and maintenance, identified reliable
funding for installation and maintenance, contact plan for the responsible individual, and a
description of how the sign program will be kept updated or removed. If the signs are to be
illuminated a description of how the power source may be removed and made safe shall be
included.
2. Demonstrate how it will enhance the streetscape by promoting a unified and enhanced
visual aesthetic consistent with the streetscape design elements in the district; coordinate
226
Page 3 of 5
information to pedestrians and drivers in a clear, consistent, and understandable format; and
reduce visual clutter.
3. Include information on how the district stakeholders were given opportunity to
collaboratively participate in the selection of the sign types and designs.
4. Clearly describe the hierarchy of signs and include the criteria for determining sign
placement and size. Any signs intended to be read from the right-of-way shall comply with
the lettering standards of the Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices for the road type
and speed.
5. The wayfinding signage plan shall include signage elevations and plans with
corresponding map designating signs types and locations.
E. Design standards. The wayfinding signs shall include and meet the following standards and
provisions:
1. Color schemes, fonts and materials. Coordinated color schemes, fonts and materials,
including base supports, cabinet details and mounting methods, shall serve to distinguish
wayfinding signage within the district from other districts.
2. Lighting. Lighting is not required. If any lighting is proposed, the wayfinding signage plan
shall include cut-sheets and lighting details in accordance with the standards established in
section 38.23.150
a. Photovoltaic panels to provide power, where appropriate, are encouraged.
3. Size and location. Signage may be located within required setbacks and may be located
within the right-of-way, with approval from the applicable review agencies including the city
and/or the state department of transportation. Restrictions for signs within the public right-of-
way may be more strict than those on private property in order to avoid conflict or confusion
with official regulatory and warning signs or interference with travel.
4. Wayfinding signs shall comply with the following standards:
a. Wayfinding signs that are affixed to a lightpost, traffic post or sign within the right-of-
way shall not exceed four square feet in area and are limited to one sign per block face
(or equivalent).
b. Any signs intended to be located within the right-of-way shall comply with the
construction standards of the Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices.
c. Freestanding wayfinding kiosks or signs are limited to one sign per two blocks (or
equivalent), shall not exceed 30 square feet in area per face and shall not exceed seven
feet in height.
d. Wayfinding signage may be located within the street-vision triangle at intersections
controlled by a traffic light.
227
Page 4 of 5
e. Decorative features including but not limited to post caps may extend an additional two
feet for a total of nine feet in height.
f. Photovoltaic panels are exempt from the height requirement.
g. Business names, logos, or other marks identifying specific parties on a directory list or
map in a kiosk shall not exceed one inch in height.
h. Wayfinding signage may not interfere with the clear passage of pedestrians or vehicles
or otherwise cause safety hazards.
i. Wayfinding signs shall not obscure or obstruct any existing regulatory, warning, or
parking control signs.
5. Wayfinding signs are allowed for parks, or for districts containing more than 30 acres of
platted lots.
6. A performance bond or other surety acceptable to the city may be required for the
maintenance, replacement, updating, and/or removal of signs in an amount acceptable to the
city.
Sec. 38.28.160. Signs erected in conjunction with nonprofit activities on public property.
A. Signs erected on public property in support of nonprofit activities, such as signs advertising
sponsors of youth and sports activities, shall be allowed only as follows:
1. The sign shall be permitted only at developed facilities in public parks or other publicly
owned lands.
2. The sign may be erected two weeks prior to the commencement of the activity and shall be
removed within two weeks after the cessation of the activity for which the sign were erected.
3. Each individual sign shall be no larger than 32 square feet. Freestanding signs must be
setback a minimum of 15 feet from the property line with a maximum height of five feet.
Signs attached to walls or scoreboards shall not be subject to the five foot height limitation.
However, signs attached to walls or scoreboards shall not exceed the height of the wall or
scoreboard to which they are attached. All signs shall be oriented towards spectators
attending the activity who are at the facility.
4. The sign shall not:
a. Be individually illuminated; nor
b. Be placed in sight vision triangles or otherwise impede or obstruct the view of the
traveling public.
228
Page 5 of 5
5. Applicants for such sign must apply for, and have approved, a special temporary sign
permit detailing the nature of the sign to be erected and the duration the sign will remain in
place. Applications and review procedures shall be made as per section 38.28.180
(Ord. No. 1645, § 18.52.150, 8-15-2005; Ord. No. 1693, § 18(18.52.150), 2-20-2007; Ord. No.
1761, exh. J(18.52.150), 7-6-2009; Ord. No. 1769, exh. J(18.52.150), 12-28-2009)
229
230
231
232
233
Encroachment Language for Bench Signs and Bus Shelters
Relocation Clause:
Any bench sign removal or relocation which becomes necessary as a result
of a state highway project affecting the right-of-way property on which the
bench sign is currently located will be done at the sole expense of the bench
sign owners. Neither MDT nor the State of Montana will pat any costs
whatsoever associated with removal or relocation which becomes necessary
due to a highway widening or improvement project of any kind. MDT will
be the sole determinant of the necessity of removal or relocation of the
bench sign.
Liability Clause:
The bench sign owners shall protect the State of Montana and save it
harmless from all claims, actions or damages of every kind which may
accrue to, or be suffered by any person or persons, by reason of the
performance of bench sign erection or maintenance work or by the improper
occupancy of the highway right-of-way. In the event any suit or action is
brought against the State, arising out of any of the above causes, the bench
sign owners will defend the suit or action at their sole expense and satisfy any judgment which may be rendered against the State.
234
Bus Shelter Ads
This is a brief summary on the position we have taken regarding bus shelter advertising. 23 CFR 713.204, 0 thru R, allows for the use of air space as long as it does not effect the integrity of the roadway. (P) allows for the normal on-premise displays which are restricted by ownership and type of activity subject
to regulation by the SHA/FHWA with regard to size, number, design and location.
23 CFR 713.204 (C), FHWA may authorize SHA to make rights of way
available for FTA- type activities. If we deem to be in the public
interest, no income will be required from the transit authority.
In a 1991 memo to the State of Georgia, we stated: Bus shelter
advertising is permissible within the right of way on any highway
system other than the Interstate system if the State provides
satisfactory assurance to FHWA that such use will not adversely
affect the highway or interfere with the free and safe flow of
traffic thereon. (You may want to check with your MUTCD safety
contact person for this)
23 CFR 750.153 (Q) 1--5, states that even though displays are
allowed; they must be under 32 square feet and must have at least a
50% public message content. Also, not more than one sign on each
shelter shall face in any one direction. In summary, the delegation of authority to approve conditions under
which right-of-way encroachments on projects may be permitted to
remain (23 CFR 1,23) lies with the Division Administrators (FHWA
Order M I 100. 1, Part 1, Chapter 5, Section 2; October 4, 1989). Bus
shelters are permitted encroachments because they serve a public
need; but, by virtue of the fact that we allow them to exist on our
right-of-way, we can control the placement, design, size and the
advertising. The advertising display area allowed should be part of
the agreement or permit and provide for open competition between
advertisers.
235