ARTS COMMISSION PRESENTATION AUGUST 16, 2021 - PRIMEGOV
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Arts Commission Presentation August 16, 2021
What we are doing…and why Signs – Why now? Resources Proposed new sign code Schedule and next steps
What we are doing…and why Development Codes Update Project
Project Purpose
• Implement planokc
• Improve development efficiency and outcomes
• Make the development process easier to navigate and administer
• Areas of focus:
• Chapter 59 Planning and Zoning Code
• Subdivision Regulations
• Sign Code
• Coordination with Drainage Code and Nuisance Codes
4
Phase 1
(Complete)
2017
• Code Diagnosis
• Recommendations PUBLIC
ENGAGEMENT
• Update Sign Code Focus Groups
• Review code methodologies ---------------
SAT
• Determine applicability to different areas ---------------
2019
Phase 2 thru
2022
• Propose code structure
• Review current
5 Subdivision Regulations
Public
Meetings
---------------
• Review and revise Code and User Group
Subdivision Drafts Trainings
• Review testing of concepts
• Training
Phase 3 2023+ • Adoption/Codification
• Implementation
Sign code: why Specific planokc policies
update?
Phase 1 recommendations
Recent rezoning applications and
moratorium
Recent court cases
Industry/business/resident concerns
planokc
Policy ST-17 Policy E-14
• Adopt new citywide site design and • Initiate new efforts to reduce sign clutter
building regulations that ensure new and improve the aesthetics of signs, while
developments meet basic functional and allowing for adequate and visible business
aesthetic minimums related to: identification by the following potential
• Walkability and bike-ability measures:
• Internal and external street connectivity • Restrict new billboards and eliminate or
• Integration of uses reduce the number of existing billboards.
• Require non-conforming signs to be removed
• Signage or be brought into compliance with existing
• Building location regulations within a specific timeframe.
• Building appearance • Consider new standards in the Sign Ordinance
• Open space (passive and active) to improve limits on the size, height, and
number of signs.
• Improve proactive enforcement of the City’s
sign regulations to curtail the placement of
illegal signs and ensure adequate maintenance
of signs.
Phase 1: Recommendations Highly Graphic and User-Friendly Layout Unified Development Code • Form-Based Zoning • Updated Conventional Zoning • Subdivision Regulations Context-sensitive Civic and Open Spaces Content-neutral Sign Standards Clear procedures for administration and review Consolidated Nuisance Standards
Is a mural a sign? Sign: a structure or device, permanently or Mural: One-of-a kind visual depictions and/or works temporarily attached to, painted on, supported by, of art including mosaic, painting or graphic art or represented on a building, fence, post or other technique applied, painted, implanted or placed structure which is used or intended to be used to directly onto the exterior of any wall of a building. A attract attention. Unless otherwise provided, a building, for purposes of this section only, means “sign” includes the erection, construction or any structure built for the support, shelter, or maintenance of any structure that meets the enclosure of persons, animals, chattels or movable definition of “sign” above. property of any kind.
Reed v. Town of Gilbert, Arizona, Reagan National Advertising of
U.S. Supreme Court (2015) Austin, Lamar Advantage Outdoor
v. City of Austin, U.S. Fifth Circuit
Cities can no longer distinguish between Court of Appeals (2020)
signs based on a sign category
determined by the message it conveys Affirmed that the government cannot
and its content. distinguish between on-premise and off-
premise signage because it is an
unconstitutional content-based
distinction.
Frederick Bruce Knutson v. The
Recent City of Oklahoma City, U.S. District
Court for the Western District of
Oklahoma (2019)
court cases Oklahoma City’s sign code impermissibly
regulates signs based on content.
City of Austin, Texas v. Reagan National
Advertising of Texas Inc., U.S. Supreme Court
(pending)
Issue: Whether the Austin city code’s distinction
between on-premise signs, which may be digitized,
and off-premise signs, which may not, is a facially
Thomas v. Bright, U.S. Sixth unconstitutional content-based regulations under
Circuit Court of Appeals (2019) Reed v. Town of Gilbert.
Affirmed that the government cannot
distinguish between on-premise and
off-premise signage because it is an
unconstitutional content-based
distinction.Resources Development Codes Update Project
AMP UP OKC:
Recommendations
Updated Roles & Revised fees for Artists and Update to Murals Policy in Update to Definition of Public Developed Standards for
Responsibilities (some bylaws) Professional Art Jurors in July January 2020 in March 2020 Curatorial Plans and Minimum
for Arts Commissioners in 2019 Qualification for Principal
December 2019 Curators in July 2020Murals Task Force: Recommendations Easier for applicants to understand More streamlined process More successful Code Enforcement Clear agreement between property owner, sponsor, and artist about length of time mural remains on site More clear definitions and regulations for mural review and a permitting Updated VARA waiver New Easement Form
Stakeholder Advisory Team (SAT) • Assist in the development of the code • Refine and provide input into code drafts • Assist in testing the code Policy Committee • City Council and Planning Commission
Focus Groups
More than 7 Focus Group Sessions Comprised of industry leaders, staff, > 80 participants
architects, planners, developers,
realtors, and City Council/Planning
Commission membersArtists Focus Group
Kris Kanaly
Kris Ermey
Kelsey Karper
Julie Robertson
Yatika Fields
Sara Cowan
Dusty Gilpin
Lisa Chronister
Robbie Kienzle
Randy MarksProposed New Sign Code Development Codes Update Project
• Highly-graphic and user-friendly
• Avoids difficult interpretations regarding content
• Improved code enforcement of abandoned and dilapidated signs
Benefits of • Streamlined approval process for murals
the new sign • Provides flexibility via Master Sign Plans
codeExisting Draft Approach
Code section Chapter 3, Article V Chapter 59, Article XVI
Regulates by content
Code Comparison (accessory and non-accessory)
Regulates by physical feature
(content neutral) *
Regulates by zoning district,
street frontage, building
width, and building setback
Regulates by zoning district,
building size, sign type, and
street typology
Regulations organized and
consolidated by sign type *
Explanatory graphics *
Flexible (master sign plan) *
* Recommended by Code Diagnosis
19What do we regulate? Dimensions (area, height, etc.) Number (e.g., per frontage) Location (District, Street, Freestanding v. Attached) Type (e.g., pole v. monument) Materials Illumination / Digital / Electronic Copy Type (e.g., integrated v channel letters) Moving parts Portability Public property Temporary time restrictions
New Sign Code: New Overview Existing
New Sign Code: Overview
Murals
Stakeholder Concerns Proposed Approach
• Need a more streamlined process that is quicker • Change from conditional use to permitted use in all
and easier for applicants to understand zoning districts (except HP/HL).
• Need clearer definitions for permitting • Streamline approval/permit process
• Need permits to distinguish murals from graffiti • Arts Commission approval not required
23
• Sign permit required. Applicants are no
longer required to be licensed sign
contractors
• Certificate of Approval is still required in
design districts but now staff may approve if
mural meet the conditions
Artists: Dylan Bradway, Kris Kanaly, and Yatika Star FieldsMurals Text
Proposed Approach
• Allow text up to 10% of the graphics or 2.5% of the
wall (up to maximum attached wall sign size)
24
Artist: Dusty Gilpin Artist: Graham Hoete, a.k.a. Mr. G.Existing code - murals
New code - murals
1 2 3
Design Development CA and/or
Review Services 26 Permit Issued
(if in a design district)
Based on Ordinances Based on New Sign Code Accela
Regulations
Includes: Includes: Includes:
• Evaluates painting on • Evaluates for compliance with • Database
unpainted surfaces sign code assures code
(typically not allowed) enforcement
coordination for
• Evaluates if mural vandalism and
detracts or obscures maintenance
structural or architectural issues
features, patterns,
massing, texturesNew Code - Murals
• Sign permits for murals
27
• VARA waivers: only required for art purchased with City fundsNew Code - Murals
• Standards for approval
28New Code - Murals
Arts Commission
• Review monthly & annual reports
Arts Liaison
29
• Advise & assist – applicants and staff
• Manage live painting event permits
Artist: JuunMurals: Live Painting Event Permit
• Allows painting to begin quickly
• Limited to previously painted surfaces
30
• National Register or Historic Landmark
properties are not eligible
• Application through Arts Liaison
Artists: Dusty Gilpin and Tank (Sergio Rameriz)Schedule & Next Steps • Public comment Sept 2021 • Design Review/Arts Commission Oct/Nov 2021 • Planning Commission Dec 2021/Jan 2022 • City Council Mar 2022 Additional Information: http://www.okc.gov/codeupdate
Questions? Development Codes Update Project
You can also read
