AgdaPkt 2008-11-10 Clsd and Reg - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

7C ~age 9 At the end of the respective extended amortization periods (two, four, or eight years as specified above), it would be at the Council's discretion to actively mitigate the remaining non-conforming signs, with the expectation that additional staff time would be required. The amortization periods areas 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 fiscal years 2010 and 2014 corresponding with the respective periods and the anticipated code enforcement effort needed. It should be noted that, at this time, there are no known non-conforming architectural/awning signs that are to be amortized.. Additionally, there is on-going commitment to mitigate all illegal, prohibited, and otherwise non-permitted signage throughout the city that is not classified as legal and non-conforming, jf complaints are brought to staffs attention. Banners on City Property: (Article III, Divisions 11 and 12) The City is interested in installing banners within and in some Instances, spanning across the public right-of-way, as well as on City-owned light standards. Up until now, such sign age was limited to signs spanning Broadway or freestanding signs on portions of the sidewalk located in a designated area called the Broadway Mall (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 Downtown, the sign ordinance has been split into two articles, one regulating signs on private property, one regulating signs on public property. Underthe proposed article which deals with signs on public property, eligibility to participate in these programs has been limited to events which are City-sponsored or co- sponsored by the City and Schools. According to the City's legal consultant on signs, this has the possibility to pose some legal issues. Staff however, feels that this is enforceable and manageable as one of several downtown programs. Public Input: On January 9, 2007, Planning and Redevelopment staff held a public workshop to gather input on the proposed ordinance modifications (Attachment 3, notes of 1.9.07 meeting). Wortshop 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 Downtown Business Group and the Architectural Review Committee in anticipation of the workshop. Additional input was received from the Historic Resource Advisory Committee for compliance to the Secretary of Interior's Standards for the treatment of historic signs. Local sign contractors were also sent a copy of the draft sign ordinance, inviting them to the workshop. On February 6, 2007 Planning and Redevelopment staff presented a summary ofthe proposed Sign regulations to the Redwood City Downtown Business Group 3