Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978-04-18; City Council; 5390-2; Public Nuisance: 5335 Paseo del NorteCITY OF CARLSBAD /; 4 fd AGENDA BILL NO. 5390-Supplement #2 DATE : April 18, 1978 DEPARTMENT: City Attorney Initial: Dept. Hd. C. c- Mgr. Attyz Subject: PUBLIC NUISANCE ALLEGED TO EXIST AT 5335 EASEO DEL NORTE-- WESELOH CHEVROLET SIGN Statement of the Matter The City Council, at your April 4, 1978 meeting, adopted I. Resolution No. 5364 setting a public hearing regarding a public nuisance which is alleged to exist at 5335 Paseo Del Norte, Weseloh Chevrolet, in the City of Carlsbad. The staff has prepared a report which indicates that the sign is in violation of the Municipal Code in that it is not located on the street frontage of the property and that it is also in violation of the specific plan for Car Country which allows only one freeway oriented sign advertising the center as a whole. It also indicates that the sign is in violation because it was constructed without a valid building permit. Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.62.010 makes a violation of the Zoning Code a public nuisance. If, after hearing the evidence on the matter, the City Council determines that the . sign is in violation of the code, and that a public nuisance therefor exists, you should direct the City Attorney to prepare an appropriate resolution. A part of that resolution sets a time limit within which the person responsible must abate the nuisance. Your instructions to the Attorney should indicate the time limit the Council wishes to establish. t Exhibit Report from Planning Department dated April 12, 1978. Memo from City Manager dated April 17, 1978. Recommendation If the City Council determines that a public nuisance exists on the subject property,,. your action is to determine a time limit for abatement of the sign and to direct the City Attorney to prepare the appropriate resolution. Counci-l action 6-7-78 The City Council determined the sign to be a public nuisance and ordered the sign removed within 30 days; further, if the sign is not removed within the 30 day period the City Attorney was instructed to proceed to file a civil abatement. DATE: April 12, 1978 TO: Paul Bussey, City Manager FRm: Don Rose, Associate Planner SUBJECT : Weseloh Chevrolet; Freestanding, Freeway Oriented Sign This memorandum responds to your request for information regarding the subject sign. Our research has produced the following: 1. Signs within the "Car Countryf1 development are regulated by the Carlsbad Municipal Code, Chapter 21.41, and Ordinance No. 9288, (Specific Plan 19). City Council Resolution No. 773, of approval for the tentative map (CT 72-3) for Tri-City Auto Plaza (Car Country). stipulated in Council Ordinance No. 9288 be complied with." signs be located on the street frontage of the lot: The conditions of Ordinance 9288 were reinforced by This resolution established conditions The first condition of approval is: "That all conditions 2. Municipal Code Section 21.41.070(5) requires that freestanding "(5) In C-1 and C-2 zones and at retail commercial use in C-M zones, one freestanding sign may be placed on each street frontage of a lot, provided that the sign area of the freestanding sign is included within aggregate sign area allowed for the lot according to the provisions of Table 1 above and that the height of the freestanding sign does not exceed the height of the building or thirty-five feet, whichever is less." Section 21.04.335 of the Municipal Code defines street thusly: "'Street' means a publicly dedicated and accepted thoroughfare which affords primary means of access to abutting property and having a minimum right-of-way width of not less than thirty feet." Clearly, a freeway -- in this case, Interstate 5 -- is not a street, per the Municipal Code. The subject sign is located approximately 8' from the 1-5 right-of-way and over 350' from Paseo Del Norte which is the "street" abutting the property and which affords the primary means of access to the Tlreseloh property. Therefore, the sign violates Section 21.41.070 of the Municipal Code. Section 21.41.075 of the Municipal Code provides for additional freestanding signs by conditional use permit: "Additional Comity Identity and Freestanding Signs. (b) Subject to the provisions of Chapter 21.50 of this section, additional freestanding signs are permitted in the C-2 zone by conditional use permit. If such signs are approved as a part 06 a master plan in a planned community, specific plan, or planned unit development, a conditional use permit is not required. Additional freestanding signs shall not be approved pursuant to this section unless it is found that the signs are appropriate for the use of the property, compatible with the adjacent properties, will not interfere with the safety of the traveling public, will not result in a proliferation of signs in the area, will not adversely affect the appearance of the area, and will not unduly restrict any views. appearance and other aspects of the additional signs, subject to the limitations of this chaDter and this section. shall be regulated by the terms of the The specific number, size, height, location, conditionalL use permit, or other-sign appmvai. sign shall be subject to the following limitations: Any additional freestanding 1. The signs are monument signs, not greater than eight feet in height or eight feet in length, or pole signs not to exceed twenty feet in height ; 2. In order to qualify for any such sign, any freestanding sign permitted by right for the property must be located at least fifty feet from any interior property line; freestanding sign on the same property; 3. The signs shall not be erected within two hundred feet of another The signs must be located at least fifty feet from an interior 4. property line; 5. The signs shall be so oriented that the primary view is from surface streets; Interstate 5 or Highway 78 shall not be considered surface streets; 6. The aggregate sign area for the entire development does not exceed No portion of such sign shall extend over the public right-of-way, The maximum sign area for any such sign shall not exceed fifty-five the sign area allowed for the development according to the provisions of Table 1; or be within fifteen feet of any driveway or corner; 7. 8. square feet .'? The subject sign was erected without a conditional use permit and oriented to 1-5. clearly demonstrates that 1-5 is not a "street". No. 5 of this ordinance states: The subject sign is not permitted by Sec. 21.41.975. This section 3. Specific Plan 19 was adopted by Ordinance No. 9288. Condition "That signing shall be limited to one freestanding freeway oriented sign, 35 feet in height, not to exceed 150 square feet; the location and sizes of on-site signs advertising the produce shall be subject to strict architectural .2 review and in no case shall they exceed requirements set forth in the City of Carlsbad Sign Ordinance No. 9224." Ordinance 9224 states: "In C-1 and C-2 zones and at retail comnercial use in C-M zones, one free- standing sign may be placed on each street frontage of a lot, provided that the sign area of the freestanding sign is included within the aggregate sign area allowed for the lot according to the provisions of Table 1 above and that the height of the freestanding sign does not exceed the height of the building or thirty-five (35) feet, whichever is less." The allowed freeway sign is a sign identifying "Car Country" and was approved by the City and erected prior to the Weseloh sign. an additional freestanding freeway oriented sign and therefore violates the conditions of approval of Ordinance No, 9288 (SP 19) and Ordinance No. 9224. The Weseloh sign constitutes 4. The question has been raised, "Is the sign a freeway oriented The subject sign is located approximately 8' from the 1-5 freeway The sign is However, the view of the sign is restricted The view of sign?" right-of-way. by the Carlsbad Municipal Code), Paseo Del Norte. have viewed the sign from all possible street vantage points. visible from Paseo Del Norte. to a short distance along Paseo Del Norte. light standards, trees, and large number of cars on display in front of the sign clutter the view of the sign and tend to be distracting. the sign from the freeway is clear and unobstructed. faces the freeway cannot be read from any of the surrounding streets. clearly intended to attract the attention of freeway users. It is located over 350' from the nearest "street" (as defined Staff from this office Even so, the distance (over 350'), The sign copy that It is 5. A building permit was issued for the sign in error on June 10, 1976. Ordinance No. 8038 was in effect at the time the permit was issued. of Ordinance 8038 states: Section 6.3 "Revocability of Permits. The Building Inspector shall revoke any If the work authorized under a sign permit has not permit issued by him upon refusal of the holder thereof to comply with the pro- visions of this ordinance. been completed within six (6) months after the date of issuance, such permit shall become null and void." Section 8.20.080 of the Municipal Code was adopted as of February 1, 1977. This Section states: "If the work authorized under a sign permit has not been completed within six months after the date of issuance, such permit shall become null and void." The Weseloh sign permit became null and void on December 10, 1976, because construction was not completed within the prescribed time. did not begin until 11 months after the expiration date. that the permit was extended. The subject sign was constructed during the week of November 14, 1977. Infact, construction There is no indication .3 . Section 21.41.010 of the Municipal Code states: "Unlawful acts -- Violation deemed misdemeanor. for any person, firm or corporation to erect, construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, improve, remove, convert, demolish, equip, use or maintain any sign within the city, or cause or permit the same to be done, contrary to or in violation of any of the provisions of this chapter. lating any of the provisions of this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor, and each such person is guilty of a separate offense for each and every day or portion there- of during which any violation of any of the provisions of this chapter is committed, continued or permitted." The sign was constructed without a valid building permit and, therefore, in violation of Section 21.41.010 of the Municipal Code. It is unlawful Any person, firm or corporation vio- Conclusion The subject sign is illegal. DR: le .4 DATE : APRIL 17, 1978 TO : CITY COUNCIL FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: WESELOH CHEVROLET FREESTANDING, FREEWAY ORIENTED SIGN Mr. Don Rose's memo dated April 12, 1978 reviews City Code pro- visions relating to the Weseloh sign adequately. A few comments concerning other aspects of this case might be in order. Over the last several years there have been several occasions to bring forward the Sign Code for City Council review. On each of these occasions the City Council has shown a reluctance to amend the code in any major way and on some of those occasions has specifically indicated that they would not want to see those sections dealing with freeway oriented signs amended to allow such signs. On several occasions Council has also authorized the staff to pursue the elimination of freestanding, freeway oriented signs. In one instance, Hadleys had been parking trucks outside their loading dock area which carried signs advertising Hadleys. These trucks were removed as violations of the sign ordinance. In another instance the City Council authorized the City Attorney to pursue the removal of a billboard sign along 1-5, opposite Altamira. Although this sign may have been a legal nonconforming use, the City Attorney was successful, with the cooperation of the property owner, in having the sign removed. These cases are mentioned primarily to point out that the City has consistently enforced its code relative to freestanding, freeway oriented signs. In agreeing, through the adoption of Specific Plan 19 to allow under special circumstances the erection of one such sign, the City Council took special interest in the exact location and design of the sign. All other auto dealers have followed the City's interpretation of our code and none have attempted to place signs along the freeway. Although a sign permit was issued to Weseloh Chevrolet under the circumstances indicated in Mr. Rose's report of April 12, 1978, it appears that Weseloh Chevrolet had some reservations about the validity of that sign permit. It is my belief that this is so because the sign permit was issued on June 10, 1976. Subsequent to that time, I had two occasions to talk directly to Mr. Weseloh relative to his desire to put a freeway oriented sign in the general location of the one erected. In October, 1976 during the dedication and open house of Weseloh Chevrolet the question was raised by Mr. Weseloh and he was informed that it was a violation of the City Code and in order to erect a sign, he would be required to seek a code amendment through the Planning Commission and the City Council. Several months later I attended a lunch with Mr. Weseloh and his sales manager to again discuss some of Weseloh Chevrolet's sign problems and again, the same advice was given. a . Page 2 April 17, 1978 Subject: Weseloh Chevrolet Sign Don Agatep, the City's former Planning Director, has informed me that he had similar conversations with Mr. Weseloh indicating that such a sign could not be erected. was it brought to my attention by Mr. Weseloh or his representatives that he was in possession of a building permit for the erection of the sign, and I assume he realized that the use of the permit was not authorized. During none of these conversations If the Council has any more questions concerning this matter, I will be glad to respond to them at the public hearing. PAUL 4. BUSSEY City Manager PDB: ldg . June 7, 1978 , Mayor Ronald Packard 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, Ca. 92008 and members of Carlsbad City Council Dear Mayor Packard: The City Council has a matter before them on the Council Agenda for June 6, continued to June 7, 1978, concerning an identification sign for Weseloh Chevrolet in Carlsbad Car Country. The Carlsbad Chamber Board of Directors know there Yias been a great deal of discussion about signs in Carlsbad, their use and the placement of signs. were authorizedin Car Country and the variances that have been issued as the Car Country project has developed. Signs are very important to the sale of certain types of merchandise, through public recognition of a known product for local a8 well as vieitor purchase and service, and is value to the firms involved and ultimately through the sales taxes of dollar value to the City of Carls bad. We understand the conditions under which signs We would ask that a continuance of this agenda item be authorized and a study committee be formed, perhaps to include a City Council member and two or three others, to review the circumstances of this specific case. With other developments taking place and others planned for this area, circumstances may warrant some relief to Weseloh Chevrolet. If I or the Chamber can be of assistance, please contact me. Since rely, Robert C. Ladwig President CARLSBAD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE - OFFICES, ELM AVENUE AT OLD SANTA FE DEPOT e