Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1992/03/26 MINLrlT~S OF A REGULAR MEETING/WORKSESSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL Thursday, March 26, 1992 Council Conference Room 5:14 p.m. Administration Building CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Councilmembers Grasser Hotton, Moore, Rindone, and Mayor Pro Tempore Malcolm ABSENT: Mayor Nader ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, City Manager; Sid W. Morris, Assistant City Manager; Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney; and Berlin Bosworrh, Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency BUSINESS 2. C'VT - BUS SERVICE MSC (Malcolm/Rjndone) to find that the bus service issue arose after the preparation of the agenda and was a time sensitive matter, therefore finding an urgency which would allow the Council to dch'be'ate and tnlr. action on the item. Approved 4-0-1 with Mayor Nader absent. Mayor Pro Tempore Malcolm stated the Council would be dealing with an issue they had taken action on earlier regarding bus service. He informed Council that the Human Relations Commission Chairman contacted the City offices and wanted to know who they needed to invite to have their hearings on personnel matters. He believed very strongly that no commission in the City should have authority to go into any personnel items without the approval of the City Attorney, City Manager, and/or Council. These were not City employees and he felt the City should stay out of it. He would like to bring back an ordinance correcting any commission's right to get involved in personnel matters without getting the City Attorney's or City Managers approval and immediately direct the Human Relations Commission not to interfere in this particular item until the Council so directed. City Manager Goss felt a positive way of wording the motion would be to state the Human Relations Commission should not get involved at this point unless they were asked to by the Council. He was concerned that he had started the process, as directed by Council, and that ff two processes were going on at the same time it would not be effective. He felt that Conncil's direction was to have the City Manager proceed with looking into the matter and that they were close to the point where the problem could be resolved. Councilman Rindone questioned why the Human Relations Commission was getting involved when that was not the direction of the Council. He thought there was a motion on the floor at the last Council meeting regarding the Council's intent. City Attorney Boogaard responded that the Commission had current statutory direction to do that as it was not indicated to the contrary. City Manager Goss responded that the motion by the Mayor at the meeting was to set up an independent committee of three individuals, which did not receive a second. He did not know that the issue of the Human Relations Commission was specifically addressed. What was addressed was that the City Manager should proceed, he felt that direction had been very clear. Minutes March 26, 1992 Page 2 Councilman Moore stated that because the commissions/committees worked for the Council and appointed by the Council, the motion should say ~review and advise by the City Manager and City Attorney subject to Council approval~. MSC (Moore/Malcolm) staff is to bring back an ordinance correcting any board/commi~sion's rights to get involved in personrid matrers that may affect the legal standing of the City without getting prior review and advise of the City Manager and City Attorney, and then subject to Council approval. Approved 44)- 1 with Mayor Nadec absent. MSC (Malcolm/Moore) direct the City Manager to contact the H, man Relations Cornrni~sion informing them fixat the Council has directed the City Manager to handle this particular situation and that they are not to become involved in the present dispute. Approved 4-0-1 with Mayor Nader absent. Council recessed to the Redevelopmerit Agency meeting at 5:21 p.m. and reconvened at 5:25 P.M. 3. REPORT DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO THE CITYS SIGN ORDINANCE TO ADDRESS SIGN PROCESSING, F-LRCTRONIC READER BOARD SIGNS, AND COMBINATION SIGN MURALS - On 1/28/92, Council directed the City Attorney and Planning Department staff to prepare draft amendments to the City's sign ordinance to address: 1) modifying the process for review of sign permits by the Zoning Administrator and the Design Review Committee; 2) allowing electronic message board signs in commercial zones; and 3) allowing combination sign-murals which may exceed the size restrictions for conventional signs. The Council also requested that the draft amendments be distributed to several groups and organizations for initial review and comment. (City Attorney and Director of Planning) Continued from the 2/18/92 meeting. Robert Leiter, Director of Planning, stated the report contained recommendations from the Planning Commission, Design Review Commission, and staff. The amendments were distributed to the Planning Commission, Economic Development Commission, Design Review Committee, Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Business Association, and Broadway Business Association for comments. #3 Allowing combination sign-murals which may exceed the size restrictions for conventional signs. Councilman Moore questioned whether a percent had been put on a combination of a sign/mural. Mr. Leiter stated a percentage was not recommended because murals by definition had a wide range of sizes. Staff was not aware of how that would be structured but it would be part of the sign review process, reviewed on a case by case basis. Mayor Pro Tempore Malcolm agreed with the DRC's concern regarding what constituted "artistic value' and felt the addition of murals would lower the sign standards for the City. MSC (Malcolm/Rindone) not to change the existing sign ordinance regarding murals (not include murals). Approved 4-0-1 with Mayor Nader absent. #2 Allowing electronic message board signs in commercial zones. Mayor Pro Tempore Malcolm felt that on occasion an electronic reader board could be done tastefully but did not want a lot of them in the City. He felt the staff recommendation to allow one in every quarter mile might be a way to see how they worked and that the Council should be very cautious. Mr. Leiter stated their basic recommendation would be, if allowed at all, to allow them perhaps on a single case basis initially for evaluation. A quarter mile was also a suggestion but staff had real concerns regarding the concept in commercial areas. Staff had a current request for a sign on southeast 'H" and Third and Minutes March 26, 1992 Page 3 understood that a similar request would be made with the auto park project, which was an industrial zoned area. MS (Grasser Horton/Malcolm) m consider decttonic reader board signs on a case by case basis throu~t,h the Planning Commlnsion. City Attorney Boogaard informed Council that they would have to deal with the legal aspects of spot zoning. Given that direction he would like to come back with the legal structure. It may be appropriate to designate a specific overlay zone where it was most appropriate and then try to let it develop in that area only first. VOTE ON MOTION: approved 4-0-1 with Mayor Nader absent Michael Steiner, representing Working Group A: Design Review/Sign, agreed with the actions taken by Council regarding murals and electronic reader boards. Mateo Camarillo, President of New Baja, Inc., 3rd and "H' Street, Chula Vista, CA, stated they had approached the City with the action item curren~y before Council. They did not have a problem with the motion as long as the study area included Third and 'H' Streets. Mayor Pro Tempore Malcolm stated their permit would be processed in a timely manner in order to ny and make up for the delay as long as staff was able to develop a legal ordinance. #1 Accelerating the process for review of sign permits by the Zoning Administrator and the Design Review Commission. Mr. Steiner informed Council that the subcommittee agreed with the ordinance that was drafted and the amendment giving it an additional three days for someone such as the Planning Director to review. They felt it would streamline and accelerate the process with written objections, ff there were objections, for the applicant. Mayor Pro Tempore Malcolm stated he did not like automatic approvals but felt that if a permit had not been issued within seven days the Council should be immediately notified. Mr. Steiner stated that their report did not endorse a specific mechanism but that the intent of the modification of the current ordinance was appropriate. They did not want to see it redefined and another form of mechanism established which would continue to delay or add additional levels. Terry Dilgard, Pacific Sign Construction, Inc., 2131 Harrison Avenue, National City, CA, stated he had just been made aware of the subcommittee to study these issues and questioned whether a representative of the sign industry had been included. He stated he had a problem with the design review process itself, the expense and the subjective process. The current process was not consistent even though the ordinance specified the sign requirements. Mr. Leiter stated these were three very specific ordinance amendments that Council had requested. The Permit Streamlining Committee, appointed by the Council, had looked at all the issues raised and were coming forward with specific recommendations to deal with the whole sign process. Mayor Pro Tempore Malcolm requested that Mr. Dilgard be notified of the next meeting so that he could work with the community group to help develop specific recommendations. Mr. Leiter stated that he did not believe there was a representative of the sign industry on the subcommittee. The subcommittee forwarded their recommendations to the Economic Development Commission who would be considering the recommendations on Wednesday. Staff would make sure that Mr. Dilgard was notified. Minutes March 26, 1992 Page 4 The EDC did have the latitude to add additional comments and refer items back. He felt that once Mr. Dilgard reviewed the recommendations he would see that they addressed the concerns expressed. Councilman Moore agreed with Mayor Pro Tempore Malcolm's concern regarding automatic approval. Mr. Leiter stated that if staff missed the seven day deadline, the applicant would notify the City, at that point the City would have 72 hours to act on the sign. If the second deadline was missed, the application would be automatically approved. Mayor Pro Tempore Malcolm questioned whether the applicant would have to give a written demand upon the lapse of the seven day deadline. Staff would then have three working days to act upon the application. He wanted it understood that this could not be done verbally, there needed to be a clear process. Mr. Leiter stated that the Streamlining Committee recommended that there be written guidelines as to which signs would be required to go before the DRC rather than having it decided at the counter by staff. He felt that would resolve a lot of the applicants concerns. IVlSC (lVlalcolm/Rindone) approve staffs recommendations regarding the Accderated Sign Processing. Approved 40-1 with Mayor Nader absent, ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None OTHER BUSINESS 4. C117 MANAGERial REPORTfS) - None 5. MAYOR'S REPORT(S) a. Mayor Pro Tempore Malcolm advised Council that the Legislative Committee voted 2-1, City Attomey and City Manager supporting and Councilman Malcolm opposing, a bill by Senator Deddeh removing the sales tax from snack foods. The fiscal impact to the City would be approximately $300,00 per year. He felt the City should work with the local legislators. City Attorney Boogaard questioned whether the Counc~ wanted to discuss the item as an urgency item as it was not agendized. MSC (Malcolm/Moore) to find that SB 177 was ~ne sensitive and had adsan after the aganda had been prepaxed, therefore finding an urgency allowing Council to dd~erate and take action on the item. Approved 4-0-1 with Mayor Nader absenL Mayor Pro Tempore Malcolm stated that Mayor Nader would not sign the letter due to concerns that the snack tax should be removed. He was not opposed to not taking any position but did not want to be on record as opposing the elimination of the snack tax. MS (Moore/Malcolm) to not take any action on SB 177. Assistant City Manager Morris stated the legislative process covered it automatically under fiscal home rule and fiscal impact to the City as approved by the Council. The Legislative Committee could have taken Minutes March 26, 1992 Page 5 immediate action, although they rarely deferred, on this bill they had. Staff was looking at it sU-/ctly from a fiscal point of view where Councilman Malcolm was looking from a broader perspective, Mayor Pro Tempore Malcolm stated it was policy to send out a letter if no action was taken by Council and if Mayor Nader would not sign the letter he would if the motion passed. He did not like the tax on snack food but also did not like being on record opposing the local representatives. Councilman Rindone felt it was a regresslye tax and would support the bill. Assistant City Manager Morris stated that it was anticipated that the bill would move through the Senate and Assembly and then to the Govemor's desk but there was a major question as to whether it would be approved by the Governor. VOTE ON MOTION: approved 4-0-1 with Mayor Nader absent 6. COUNCIL COMMENTS o None ADJOURNMENT ADJOURNMENT AT 5:50 P.M. to the Regular City Council Meeting on Tuesday, April 7, 1992 at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. Respectfully submitted, BEVERLY A~ AUTHELET, CMC, City Clerk by: Vicki C. so~erquist, Dep!t~\,City Clerk \