Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Signage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Spokane planners weigh amortizing billboards, compensation and historic sign protections
Summary
City staff proposed a phased approach to remove nonconforming off-premise signs, citing roughly 350 affected structures concentrated in four neighborhoods; commissioners asked for clearer definitions, protections for historically significant signs and staff to return with draft code and a workshop.
At a Jan. 14 Spokane Planning Commission meeting, city staff presented a policy framework to phase out nonconforming off-premise advertising signs, outline possible compensation where state permits are involved and protect historically significant signs.
Adam McDaniel of the mayor’s office told the commission the city’s inventory likely includes “at least there’s probably 350” nonconforming signs and proposed a graduated amortization schedule that would prioritize removal of abandoned signs in neighborhood retail and residential zones before downtown and commercial zones. McDaniel said Wenatchee’s 2020 ordinance, which set a 10-year removal schedule, provided one example of how cities have approached amortization.
The proposed framework would also treat signs that WSDOT permitted differently because removal could require compensation tied to scenic easement provisions. “We would like to give the council the authority…to appropriate any sort of compensation that would be required to remove those signs,” McDaniel said, calling for a policy that balances legal risk and neighborhood objectives.
Commissioners pressed staff to clarify definitions and timelines. Several members said a six-month threshold for labeling a sign “abandoned” was too short and could penalize building owners who are actively marketing space for lease or preparing to restore a marquee as part of a redevelopment. One commissioner suggested a one-year timeline or a pause in the abandoned status where property owners can show good-faith leasing efforts.
Historic preservation was a recurring concern. Staff noted suggestions from preservation specialists to identify and protect signs with community or architectural value (examples cited by staff included a Riverside-area Dossin sign and other locally valued marquees). Staff said they can develop a process to flag candidate signs for special treatment.
On the legal front, commissioners raised questions about potential takings claims if the city were to require removal or reduce market value for some structures. Staff said they are coordinating with legal counsel and following other jurisdictions’ precedents while aiming for voluntary compliance first; code enforcement would be the last resort. “There are concerns there and the process matters — adequate notice and timeline are factors we’re paying close attention to,” staff said.
Next steps: staff told the commission that draft code language is nearing readiness and that they anticipate returning with a more detailed workshop and a draft ordinance for commissioner review. The staff recommended a graduated approach rather than a single, uniform amortization across all zones.
The Planning Commission did not take a formal vote on an ordinance at the meeting; staff were directed to refine definitions, assess compensation exposure for signs permitted by state agencies, and return with a more complete draft for workshop review.
