Laserfiche WebLink
7.4B <br /> Page 51 <br /> (Attachment 4, notes of 2.6.07 meeting). input received as a result of these outreach <br /> efforts have been considered by staff and legal counsel to the City on this topic. <br /> Environmental Review: <br /> The amendment of an adopted sign ordinance is no# specifically defined under the <br /> California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as a "project" triggering the need for <br /> environmental review. CEQA Guideiines (Section 15061(b}(3)] provide lead agencies with <br /> a "common sense" exemption for such actions but the project does not fafl within a <br /> sta#utory or categorical exemption. This common sense exemption applies if an agency <br /> can determine with ��ertainty that the action will not produce significant environmental <br /> effects, <br /> T�2 Nropo�e� changes ta the sign ordinance primarily respond to changes in State and <br /> Federal laws. The proposed changes do not affect underlying sign standards in the <br /> ordinance such as the number, placement, size, and maximum area calculationsforsigns, <br /> nor do they change the requirements for �bt�ining permits for signs. The proposed <br /> changes would not enable more or different types of signs#o be constructed in F�edwood <br /> City. Therefore, the proposed changes to the sign ordinance are not expected to produce <br /> significant adverse environrnental effects and, using the "cammon sense" exemption, are <br /> not subject to environmental review according to CEQA. <br /> Alternatives <br /> 1. Approve the sign ordinance as proposed. <br /> 2. Modify the sign ordinance. <br /> 3. Refer the sign ordinance back to Planning staff for further study. <br /> Fiscal lmpac# <br /> If the proposed sign ordinance is adopted, then additional sign code enforcement <br /> resources may be anticipated in 2011 and 2Q15 far active enforcement of non-confarming <br /> sig���, a���un�if's discretian. There is no �t�er fis�a� �����,act art��ipat�d {ar the City. As in <br /> the past, staff will continue to enforce non-conforming signs based upon complaints <br /> received or applications for new sign �ermits. Planning and buiiding application fees will <br /> continue ta contribute to the cost of design review and inspection of signs. <br /> . b <br /> V � C���--- � <br /> Charles a Gary elfy J' kas <br /> Principal n er/ Planning Analyst anning ager� <br /> %�' .Y <br /> V . <br /> Peter Ingram Ed Everett <br /> Community Deve opment Director City Manager <br />