AgdaPkt 2007-06-04 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

commercial message for his own business or advertisements for political candidates. He stated that they do not think the City's regulations should be stricter than state regulations M/S Foust/Aguirre to close the public hearing. The motion passed by unanimous voice vote by those present. Council comments began with questions on the number of billboards in the City; variances regarding onsite commercial messages versus offsite commercial messages; the recommendation to exempt billboards within 660 feet of the freeways since they are covered under state law (and thereby ceding their regulatory right ); billboards in agricultural or landscaped areas and light and heavy industrial areas; upgrading to a large TV-type screen versus billboards; vested, legal rights; enforcement and funding to reduce clutter and illegal temporary signs; roof signs; legal concerns about property rights; and closing comments. Principal Planner Jany estimated that there are currently about a dozen billboards in the City and there have been no billboards approved since at least the late 1960s and early 1970s. Therefore, he concluded that the old 1968 ordinance did not allow billboards. Regarding the questions about roof signs that are visible from aircraft, he stated that they currently do not see a need to regulate them. Council expressed their concerns and suggestions that the amortization schedule be increased and they modify the part regulating billboards, remove reference to use and prohibit construction at this time, and do more outreach to the community and business owners. City Attorney Yamamoto recommended that Council adopt a rule that applies evenly across the board so that people can determine whether or not it will apply to them or not. He stated that the effort to amend the sign ordinance has been ongoing for at least five years and that ordinances are subject to future Council amendment as needed. He further suggested that Council could then revisit certain sections of the ordinance rather than the entire thing at a future date. M/S Howard/Bain to approve City Attorney Yamamoto's recommendation to amend Chapter 3 of the Municipal Code regulating advertising and signs and approve the following three recommendations: approve making the following findings, rescind the existing sign ordinance and introduce the proposed sign ordinance, that the motion is made with the understanding that at a future date they will come back with additional information on billboard policy and amortization schedule. ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE ONE, TWO AND THREE OF CHAPTER 3 OF THE REDWOOD CITY MUNICIPAL CODE ADVERTISING AND SIGNS AND SIGNS ON PUBLIC PROPERTY JOINT CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD AND APRIL 23, 2007 PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY MEETING MINUTES PAGE 9