Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 01-21-74 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN PLANNING AGENCY January 21, 1974 The regular meeting of the City of Tustin Planning Agency was held on the 21st day of January, 1974, in the Council Chambers, 275 South "C" Street, Tustin, California. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmen: Saltarelli, Langley, Sharp, Welsh, Woodruff. Absent: Councilmen: None. Others present: City Administrator Harry Gill Assistant City Administrator for Community Development Ken Fleagle City Attorney James Rourke City Clerk Ruth Poe Recording Secretary Kathy Morrison PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. SIGN CODE DRAFT (Continued from 1/14/74) Mr. Flea~le stated that since January 14th public hearing on the Sign Code draft, the Chamber of Commerce had conducted a workshop study meeting with the Mayor and members of the Sign Committee in attendance. Mr. Fleagle narrated a slide presentation addressing a question which has been raised as to how the new Code would affect existing signs; the slides illustrated cases of non-conforming signs (under the new Code) of various types, which would have to be removed or modified to meet the new Code. The public portion of the hearing was opened at 8:42 p.m. Mr. Grad¥ Henry, 1st National Bank of Orange County, 14601 Red Hill Avenue, Tustin, requested that the Ordinance be worded to apply to all signs in the City at the time of adoption. Referring to Article IV, Section 5-F, dealing with prohibited off-premise signs, Mr. Henry said it appears to eliminate real estate signs and temporarv construction signs identifying institutions financing a project or the builder, etc. Councilman Woodruff pointed out that there is specific authority in the ordi- nance for the temporary construction signs showing financing, architect, etc. In regard to Article VIII, Section 9, ~8, regarding monument-type business identification signs in commercial districts, Mr. Henry requested that these be authorized for single businesses in structures of not less than 4,000 square feet, rather than 5,000 square feet. Mr. Raymond Kemp, 422 West Sixth Street, Tustin, member of the Sign Committee, stated t~at as a result of the workshop with the Chamber of Commerce, the following changes in t~he Code are proposed: Article VIII, Section 9, ~8, under Remarks. It is proposed that the wording be changed to "Authorized for detached single business in structure of not less than 4,000 square feet". bo Article VI, Section 1 - Right of Continued Use. It is proposed that wording be changed to provide that any signs non-conforming but law- ful in existence prior to the effective date of this Ordinance may continue to be maintained and used as a lawful non-conforming sign until there is a change in either ownership or use or identity, in which instance it may be brought into voluntary conformity as out- lined in Section 2 of Article VI, by notice of intent and completion of work within 60 days of filing that notice, or it shall become sub- ject to the provisions of Article IV, Section 2 of this Ordinance, dealing with Unlawful Signs. Planning Agency Minutes 1/21/74 Page 2 Article VI, Section 4-B, regarding the abatement schedule for painted wall signs. It is proposed that a change be made to require bringing into conformity "within four months of the effective date of this Ordinance", rather than "by July 1, 1974". Article IV, Section 4-A, regarding Maintenance Requirements. The following change in wording is requested in the second paragraph of Section 4-A: "...shall be cause for the City to order that the sign be brought into conformity in all respects as to size, height and stationary requirements" Mr. Kemp explained that this is proposed as an alternative to any form of amortization; the effect would be that even a grossly non-conforming sign can stay as is until or unless it falls into disrepair, at which time, the City could decide that this non-maintenance is reason for the sign to be brought inho compliance in all respects, not just maintenance. In reply to Councilman Woodruff's question, Mr. Kemp explained that the determination of the unmaintained status of any sign would not be discretionary, as maintenance requirements and procedures are defined and not subject to opinion. ee Article VIII, Section 8, Allowed Signs in Commercial Districts. It is recommended that the minimum street frontage requirement be changed from 150 feet to 75 feet, to enable a small, detached building, with setback, to still have a free-standing business identification sign. Councilman Woodruff requested that Mr. Kemp provide these comments to Mr. Fleagle for distribution to the Council. Mr. Stephen L. Schuster, 245 East First Street, Tustin,stated that he is still against amortization, as there are a large number of signs affected, and that there are some good alternatives. He felt that something should be done for the people who can't have signing because of some technicality. Mr. Dominic Correa, owner of Roma D Italia, 611 E1 Camino Real, Tustin, said that the Sign Ordinance has been discussed for some time and adjust- ments have been made, but he doubted that it would ever come out right. He said he was giving up, and if the City Council wanted his sign they could come and get it. There being no further comments or objections, the public portion of the hearing was closed at 9:00 p.m. Moved by Woodruff, seconded by Welsh that the consideration of the Sign Code be continued to February 4, 1974. Carried unanimously. ADJOURNMENT There being no further Planning Agency business, the meeting was adjourned to a regular City Cow~cil meeting, immediately following. (9:01 p.m.) PLANNING A~ENCY RECORDING SECRETARY f y M~YOR