HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-11-25 - AGENDA REPORTS - SIGN REGS UDC (2)Agenda Item: _q
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
AGENDA REPORT
PUBLIC HEARING City Manager Approval:
Item to be presented by: Carl Newton/Don Davis
DATE: November 25, 2003
SUBJECT: AMEND, RESTATE AND REORGANIZE VARIOUS SECTIONS
OF CHAPTER 17.19 SIGN REGULATION OF THE UNIFIED
DEVELOPMENT CODE (UDC)
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Building Services
RECOMMENDED ACTION
That the City Council conduct public hearing, introduce an ordinance entitled AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING MASTER CASE 03-254, WHICH AMENDS AND RESTATES
CHAPTER 17.19 ENTITLED "SIGN REGULATIONS (PRIVATE PROPERTY)" OF TITLE 17
OF THE SANTA CLARITA MUNICIPAL CODE and pass to second reading.
BACKGROUND
When the City incorporated in 1987, the City Council adopted by reference the Los Angeles
County Code, including its sign regulations, as required by law. Several years later in 1990, the
City Council adopted Ordinance No. 90-35. This ordinance amended the County's sign
regulations that had been adopted by reference to add some new definitions and also made
changes to the types, size, height and number of permitted signs. Ordinance 90-35 also
established a nine-year amortization period for legal nonconforming signs.
In 1999, the City adopted Ordinance No. 99-16. This ordinance codified the former County sign
regulations (as modified) as Chapter 17.19 of the Santa Clarita Municipal Code ("Sign Code").
Because the City desired to process applications for sign permits in a manner different from that
of the County, many of the changes introduced by Ordinance No. 99-16 pertained to the
administration of sign permit applications.
Upon the expiration of the original nine-year amortization period for nonconforming signs, staff
yyi,�i,
yy t s � j+E L0
I lI IF U
began requiring that such signs be brought into conformity with the provisions of the current
Sign Code. Asa result of this enforcement activity, along with staffs cumulative experience in
the day-to-day administration of the Sign Code, staff felt that it was time revisit the regulations in
order to clarify some of the provisions and eliminate many of the vestiges of the former County
sign regulations. This internal review resulted in the initiation of Unified Development Code
Amendment 03-001 (Master Case 03-254) on June 16, 2003 to amend and restate Chapter 17.19
of the Municipal Code and Unified Development Code.
On August 19, 2003, the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding the proposed
amendments to Chapter 17.19. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend
approval to the City Council.
ANALYSIS
The proposed amendments are attached as Exhibit A to the ordinance. The amendments include
procedures for removing illegal signs, restrictions on new off-site commercial signs (billboards),
restate the purposes of the regulations, and enhance the procedures for processing sign permit
applications. The following is a summary of some of the key provisions.
The proposed amendments to Section 17.19.010 [Purpose] reemphasize that the primary
municipal interests advanced by these regulations are improving the aesthetic appearance of the
community and vehicular and pedestrian safety. These goals are furthered in the regulations
through provisions directed at minimizing visual clutter, reducing driver distraction, and
protecting sight lines for drivers and pedestrians. Th is section also restates the City's
long-standing policy of generally restricting commercial signs to on-site locations. Finally, this
Section reaffirms the City's commitment to regulate signs in a constitutional manner that is
"viewpoint neutral" as to commercial signs (i.e., the type of business, product or service
identified by the sign is irrelevant provided it is located or available on the premises) and
"content neutral" as to noncommercial signs (i.e., any constitutionally protected noncommercial
message may be posted).
Section 17.19.020 [Definitions] amends the definition of what constitutes a "sign," adds
definitions for "on-site" and "off-site" signs, as well as definitions to assist in distinguishing
between "commercial" and "noncommercial" signs. Definitions regarding "illegal" and "unsafe"
signs are also proposed to be added to assist in on-going enforcement efforts.
Section 17.19.030 [Applicability] clarifies that the Sign Code is directed at private property and
the property owned by public agencies other than the City over which the City has land use
jurisdiction. At a later date, staff will bring forward proposed policies regarding temporary and
permanent signage on Cityproperty (e.g., parks, sidewalks, public rights-of-way, etc.).
Section 17.19.040 [General Provisions] clarifies that a noncommercial message may be
substituted for any commercial message on a permitted sign. Although businesses rarely desire
to use their signage for such purposes, the First Amendment requires that noncommercial speech
be on equal if not greater footing than commercial speech.
The proposed amendments to Section 17.19.060 [Administration] and the addition of proposed
Section 17.19.260 [Appeals] would clarify that a sign permit applicant is entitled to the
following procedural safeguards: (1) a decision regarding a complete sign permit application
must be rendered by the Director within 20 business days; (2) an application must be approved
by the Director if it complies with all of the enumerated standards of the Sign Code; (3) when an
application is denied in whole or in part, the Director must state in writing the specific grounds
for the denial; (4) an applicant who disagrees with the decision of the Director may file an appeal
first to the Planning Commission, and then to the City Council, within 15 days of the date of
decision; (5) the Planning Commission or City Council, as applicable, is required to hear an
appeal within 30 days after the City receives notice of the appeal; and (6) if the City Council
upholds the appeal, the applicant may promptly seek judicial review under the procedures set
forth in California Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.8.
The proposed provisions of Section 17.19.080 [Design, Material, Construction and Maintenance
Standards] reflect the need to conform the Sign Code to the provisions of related documents such
as the City 's Architectural Design Guidelines.
Proposed Section 17.19.230 [Temporary Freestanding Signs] clarifies that all properties are
entitled to two small temporary signs for the purpose of posting general noncommercial
messages (residential properties would also be permitted to post commercial messages such as
signs for a "Yard Sale"). In addition, every property would be permitted a small temporary sign
for each political candidate or issue during election periods. Currently, the Sign Code is silent as
to whether temporary noncommercial signs are permitted in residential areas as well as in
commercial zones.
Proposed Section 17.19.240 [Prohibited Signs] would add off-site signs to the list of prohibited
types of signs. With the exception of off-site freeway commercial signs, the amendments would
eliminate all other off-site advertising strictures. The City's existing billboards will be entitled
to remain in place as nonconforming uses, however, thereby allowing some continued
opportunities for off-site advertising.
In the absence of applicable nuisance abatement procedures in the Municipal Code, proposed
Section 17.19.250(D) would adopt the abatement procedures found in the Business &
Professions Code Sections 5499.1 — 5499.15. This will provide the City with an alternate
enforcement remedy for addressing Sign Code violations.
With respect to regulations pertaining to on-site signs, the proposed ordinance contains findings
stating that the amendments are not more restrictive than the City's existing regulations for
on-site signs, and that to the extent that the new regulations do affect the type, number, area or
height of on-site signs, the regulations will only apply to new on-site signs.
The remaining proposed amendments largely reflect an attempt to enhance the Sign Code's
clarity and to eliminate inconsistent or repetitive provisions that have accumulated over the years
thereby making the Code more streamlined and user-friendly.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
Other direction, amendments or modifications as determined by the City Council.
Council may choose not to introduce the proposed ordinance.
FISCAL IMPACT
No fiscal impacts are anticipated from this action.
ATTACHMENTS
Ordinance
Proposed Amendments to the UDC
Staff Report to Planning Commission on August 19, 2003 (Reading file)
Planning Commission Resolution P03-24 (Reading file)
City of Santa Clarita
Notice of Public Hearing
PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN:
A Public Hearing will be held before the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita to
consider the intention of the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita to amend,
reorganize and restate various sections of Chapter 17.19 Sign Regulations of the
Unified Development Code (UDC).
The hearing will be held by the Santa Clarita City Council in the City Hall Council
Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, 1st floor, on the 25th day of November, 2003,
at or after 6:00 p.m.
Proponents, opponents, and any interested persons may appear and be heard on this
matter at that time. Further information may be obtained by contacting the
Planning Division, Kelvin Parker, (661) 255-4330, Planning and Building Services,
23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita, CA, 91355.
If you wish to challenge this action in court, you may be limited to raising only those
issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in
written correspondence delivered to City Council, at, or prior to, the public hearing.
Dated: November 3, 2003
Sharon L. Dawson, CMC
City Clerk
Publish Date: November 4, 2003