AgdaPkt 2007-05-07 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

7.4B Page 50 At the end of the respective extended amortization periods (two, four, or eight years as specified above), it would be at the Counci('s discretion to ac#ively mitigate the remaining non-conforming signs, with the expectation that additional staff time would be required.The amortization periods are as follows: a) Non-conforming roof signs, four year period ending 2011 b) Non-conforming freestanding signs, eight year period ending 2015 Consequently, a half-time sign code enforcement position would need to be budgeted for the fiscat years 201Q and 2014 corresponding with the respec#ive periods and the ar#ici�ated code enfarcement effort needed. It should be noted tha#, at this time, there are no known non-conforming architecturailawning signs that are to be amortized:Additionalfy, there is on-going commitment ta mitigate ail illegal, prohibited, and otherwise non-permitted signage throughout the ci�y that is noi classified as iegal and non-conforming, if complaints are brought to staff's attention. Banners on City Property: (Article lll, Divisions 11 and 92} The City is interested in installing 6anners within and in some instances, spanrting across the public right-of-way, as wel! as on City-owned (ight standards. Up until now, such signage was limited to signs spanning Broadway or freestanding signs on portions of the sidewalk located in a designated area called the Broadway MaEI (per Section 33 of the Municipal Code). In order to provide a more focused approach as well as a better regulatory structure to foster such signs in our powntown,the sign ordinance has been spiit into two articles, one regulating signs on private property, one regulating signs on public property. Under fhe proposed article which deals with signs on public property, eligibility to participate in these programs has been fimited to events which are City-sponsored or co- sponsored by the City and Schools. According ta the City's 4egal consultant on s'sgns, this �a� t"E �assit�ility to pose sor�e (ega� issues. �taff�ow�ver, feei�tF�at#his is enforceabie and manageable as one of several downtown programs. Public Input: On January 9, 2007, Planning and Redevelopment staff held a public workshop to gather i�pui on the proposed ordinance modificaiions (�t�ac�m�rt 3, nofies of 1 .�.07 meeting}. Workshop invitation flyers as well as copies of the draft sign ordinance were sent to the Redwood City Chamber of Commerce, the San Mateo Board of Realtors, the Down#own Business Group and the Architectural Review Committee in anticipation of fihe workshop. Additiona! input was received firom the Historic Resource Advisory Committee for compliance to the Secretary of Interior's Standards for the treatment of historic signs. �ocal sign contractors were aiso sent a copy of the draft sign ordinance, inviting them to the workshop. On February 6, 2007 Pianning and Redevelopment staff presented a summary af the proposed Sign reguiations to the Redwood City Downtown Business Group 3