The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Statement 1977/ 3/29 item 12 CITY OF CHULA VISTA ITEM N0. 43-4� 12 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT 3�29�� FOR MEETING OF:�� Public hearing - Consideration of amendment to Municipal Code relating ITEM TITLE� to freestanding signs in the C-N zone Ordinance 1734 - Amending Section 19.34.040 of the Municipal Code relating to freestanding signs in the C-N zone SUBMITTEO BY� Di rector of P1 anni ng ;,,� SkCUfvt� �L'ADiNG AND ADOPTI4N �v..;� 1TEM EXPLANATION� r A. BACKGROUND 1 . On July 27, 1976 the City Council considered a report submitted by the Planning Department regarding freestanding signs in the C-N zone. The City Council had previ- ously expressed concern over the potential proliferation of freestanding signs in the neighborhood shopping districts because the present regulations allow one freestanding sign for "Each lot, commercial complex, or building designed for occupancy by more than one business. " �Section 19.34.040) The said Planning Department report had recommended that the word "lot" be deleted. The City Council , however, referred the matter� back to the Planning Department for additional suggestions predicated on the City Council 's comments made at the meeting. 2. The proposed zoning text amendment is categorically exempt from environmental review as a Class 11 (a)exemption. 3. At their meeting of February 23, 1977, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution (see attached) establishing a policy allowing additional interim signing for partially developed C-N centers under the planned signing program procedure. B. DISCUSSION l . There are currently eight areas in the City of Chula Uista that are zoned C-N. Two of these areas are traversed by a street, resulting in ten separate commer�ia� complexes. The following table is a breakdown of he n mber of �freestanding (s°unp�ement°a� g EXHIBITS ATT�CHE� e . Agreement Resoiution Ordinance X Plat Other P�A-76-11 Environrnental Document: Attached Submitted on STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Concur with Planring Commission recommendation. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION� On February 23, 1977 the Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend that the City Council adopt the proposed zoning text amend- ment relating to freestanding signs in the C-N zone in accordance with Resolution PCA-76-11 . COUNCIL ACTION� � . p , Placed on first reading, March 22. , 1977 , ��4��"`'� �. Form A-113 �Rev.5—75 AGENDA ITEM N0:�T=�a= 12 Supplemental Page 2 signs in the C-N zone and tr�e sign user and number of lots therein. FREESTANDING SIGNS IN THE C-N ZONE Shopping Center Location # of Lots � # of Si ns Sign Users 1 . Bonita Road & Sandalwood Road 2 2 Shopping Center & Union 76 Station 2. 100 block East "J" Street 1 1 Tenant signing (4) 3. Hilltop Drive & Naples Street 4 1 Mobil Station 4. Hilltop Drive & E. Rienstra St. 3 3 7-Eleven, Realtor, and Thrifty Station 5. NWC E. Grange & Melrose Ave. 2 2 Alpha Beta and Exxon 6. NEC E. Orange & Melrose Ave. 2 2 7-Eleven & Union 76 7. Otay Valley Road & Melrose Ave. 1 None Uacant 8. NEC Telegraph Canyon & E. L St. 3 2 7-Eleven, Thrifty Station and vacant 9. SEC Telegraph Canyon & E. L St. 1 1 Mobil Station (across both lots) 10. Otay Lakes Road & Gotham Street 1 2 7-Eleven & Standard 21 16 2. The preceding table shows that 50% of a11 the signs are used by service sta- tions and 30% by markets. Only one sign has provided tenant identification, and only one provides shopping center identification (Whispering Trees) . The Hilltop Drive and East Rienstra Street sign which identifies only the realty firm is located on a parcel which has 5 other tenants and is still partially vacant. 3. Of the ten shop�ing areas, two centers (Hilltop and Naples, and Telegraph Canyon and East "L" Street) would be allowed additional freestanding signs under the present wording of the ordinance. The center at Hilltop and Naples has been in existence for more than a decade, but there have been no req�ests for additional signs at that location. The center at Telegraph Canyon and East "L" Street has one vacant parcel . If developed, it is likely that a freestanding sign would be used since the parcel is not readily visible from Telegraph Canyon Road. 4. Council had expressed concern over the inability of the Code to require exist- ing sign users to allow new tenants to be represented on the existing sign. It may be desirable for new tenants to be identified on existing signs, but from a practical standpoint, it is not feasible to governmentally mandate such by ordinance. The owner of a center often has an agreement with the major tenant for signing and by the terms of the agreement, cannot require the major tenant to alter the sign. Unless the sign user voluntarily allows the sign to be modified, other tenants in the center are not going to have identification on a freestanding sign. The permitting of addi- tional freestanding signs for deprived tenants would substantially increase sign pro- liferation. The Planning Commission recognized the problem which has developed whereby existing centers which were constructed in conjunction with a service station in many cases would be denied a freestanding sign because one was previously erected for the station. The Planning Commission resolved the problem by simply providing in the ordinance that in existing centers � freestandi�ng service station sign would be al- lowed to remain and would not count towards the total number of signs allowed. . ; } . _ _ � ..__._ AGENDA ITEM N0. ��_��= 12 Supplemental Page 3 C. ANALYSIS 1 . After evaluatino the existina neiahborhood shonnina centers. staff concluded that those in which more than one ownership exists are not distinguishable from those under a single ownership. Both types are either readily identifiable as a neighborhood center, or adequate signing exists. Allowing for additional signs simply on the basis of ownership pattern would only add to the proliferation of signs in the neighborhood area. The problem can only exist in the already established centers as new centers are required by the present sign ordinance to submit a sign program before construction begins. 2. The survey shows that each of the service stations located within the existing neighborhood centers has a freestanding sign. While this is traditional with service stations, the basis for the tradition in neighborhood centers is elusive. Such service stations enjoy good visibility and their design and layout make them instantly identifiable as a service station. Typically, the permitted wall signs are sufficient to iidentify the particular oil company. 3. It should be noted that the typical problem which arises in a partially de- veloped center is one of identify. Depending on the size of the neighborhood center and the make-up of existing businesses, the center may suffer real identity problems if it is only partiaTly developed. The resolution adopted by the Planning Commission which allows interim signs to be erected under the planned signing procedure for given periods of time will help provide effective sign.ing until the center is completed. e. RESQLUTIOPa N0. PCA-76-11 �� RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNI�G CQMMISSION RECOM�ENDING TO �/ f THE CITY COUNCIL THE ADOPTION OF RN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 19.34.040 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO FREESTANDING SIGNS IN THE C-N ZONE WHEREAS, Section T9.34.040 of the Municipal Code relating to sign regulations in the C-N zone allows one freestanding sign for each lot, comnercial complex or building designed for occupancy by more than one business, and WHEREAS, the Chula Vista City Council directed that the Planning Department study and give cons9deration to a possible amendment of said regulation, and WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing to consider a proposed amendment to the Municipal Code, and WHEREAS, a hearing was he)d at said time and place, namely 7:00 p.m., ti February 23, 1977 in the Council Chamber, City Nall, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Co�nission and said hearing was thereafter closed, and WHEREAS, the proposed zoning text amendment is categorically exempt from environmental review as a class 11 a exemption. , NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: 1. From facts presented to the Planning Commission, the Commission finds that public necessity, convenience, generat welfare and good zoning practice require that Section 19.34.04Q A.2.a be revised to read as follows: "Each neighborhood shopping center or shopping complex, consisting of one parcel or contiguous parcels, shall be allowed one freestanding pole sign, (in existing developed shopping centers a freestanding service station sign shall be allowed to remain and will not be included in determining the total number of signs allowed)," 2. The Planning Commission recommends to the City Council that said amend- ment be adopted. 3. That the resolution be transmitted to the City Council. PASSEQ AND APPROVED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMh1ISSI0N OF CHULA UISTA, CALIFORNIA ' thfs 23rd day of February, 1977 by the fo7lowing vote, to-wit: AYES: Corrmissioners R. Johnson, Starr, Renneisen, G. Johnson, Chandler and Pressutti NOES: Commissioner Smith ABSENT: None ,��u �. ��..,.��-� AT'.'EST: Cha i rman `i��,'��"/�-�— '' Secretary