HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-05-05; City Council; 11670; OFFSITE REAL ESTATE SIGNAGE (ZCA 90-02)AB # ij: 6 9 0 TITLE: OFFSITE REAL ESTATE SIGNAGE
(ZCA 90-2) MTG, 5/5/92
DEPT. PLN
BE
CI'
CI'
h
cn cn d I rn 2
U a,
$ JZ *d
0 a $4
a a,
c) 3 a 0 $4 U c ?I
a s
3 cu 4 I hl rn
0 2
do
0 m
-4 u
2
u
a 0 (d
3 4
a a,
a
l+ .ti
3 0 u
c) G
z 0 6 <
-
d z 3 0 0
"Y- CIT~F CARLSBAD - AGEN~BILL
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
If the City Council concurs, the Planning Commission and staff are recommending tha
Council ADOPT City Council Resolution No. 99 - 12 r' APPROVING the
Declaration and INTRODUCE Ordinance No. 09- 1$4 APPROVING the propo!
code amendment conditionally allowing off-site real estate signs.
ITEM EXPLANATION
On March 4,1992, the Planning Commission approved (7-0) resolutions recommending
of ZCA 90-2 to the City Council. This zone code amendment would conditionally all
advertising real property for sale, lease, or exchange to be placed on the property o
This amendment is necessary to maintain consistency with recent amendments to the
Civil Code regarding offsite real estate signage.
While the recent state legislation did preempt local ordinance with regard to the allc
offsite real estate signage, it did not affect the City's ability to control the size, appear;
location of that signage, especially with regard to placement of such signage in pr
public rights-of-way.
In order to conform to the state legislation and still maintain the quality of sign control
enjoyed, certain provisions have been incorporated into the conditional allowance of c
estate signs. These provisions are:
That written consent be obtained from the owner of the property upon
sign is to be located;
That no other offsite real estate sign be located on the same propel
proposed real estate sign;
- That the information on the sign be limited to the selling owner's, or the
name, address, telephone number, and directions to the property;
That the size of the offsite real estate sign not exceed the maximums
Section 21.41.070(4) for either the zoning of the advertised prope
property upon which the sign is located, whichever is more restrictive;
- That the sign conform to all development standards of any applicak
zone or special treatment area.
As elaborated in the attached staff report, dated March 4, 1992, the proposed 2
amendment is consistent with the various elements of the General Plan, the various
of the Local Coastal Program, and the recent amendments to Sections 712 and *
California Civil Code relating to real property for sale signs.
. 0 0
PAGE 2 OF AGENDA BILL NO. / \ r h 7 (3
The ordinance that was attached to Planning Commission Resolution No. 3359 conta
additional item deleting the maximum number of days in advance of an election that ca
signs can be erected. Staff was using this opportunity to delete this requirement per F
direction from the Attorney's Office. However, this item was not properly considered nc
on by the commission. In order to follow legally adequate procedural requiremei
campaign sign item has been deleted from the attached ordinance. Staff will prc
subsequent zone code amendment addressing the campaign sign issue.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
On March 4,1992, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Negative De(
issued by the Planning Director. Since this amendment will not change the size restric
the signage, and signs will only be allowed on private property, the Planning Director det
that, as conditioned, no significant adverse environmental impacts will result from this p
FISCAL IMPACT
No permit will be required for such signage and no revenue will generated, however no s
will be consumed in processing applications. No increase in Code Enforcement persor
is expected and, therefore, no fiscal impacts to the City are anticipated.
EXHIBITS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
City Council Resolution No. 72- /s 7
City Council Ordinance No. MA e- 49 8
Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3358 and 3359
Planning Commission Staff Report, dated March 4, 1992
Excerpts of Planning Commission Minutes, dated March 4, 1992
Excerpts from California State Assembly Bill 2949
*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
lo
11
12
13
14
15
16
I'
18
19
2o
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3358
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A ZONE
CODE AMENDMENT TO AMEND CHAPTER 21.41 OF THE
CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING OFFSITE REAL
ESTATE SIGNAGE.
CASE NAME: OFFSETE REAL ESTATE SIGNAGE
CASE NO: ZCA 90-2
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 4th day of M
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said req
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and con
testimony and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the
submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, tk
Commission considered all factors relating to the Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
as follows:
A)
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, tl
Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Negative Declaratic
to Exhibit "ND", dated January 10, 1991, and "PII", dated Januar
attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following find
Findings:
1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the
have a significant impact on the environment.
As no site specific project is proposed with this amendment, no sensiti
located so as to be significantly impacted by this project.
2.
....
....
....
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
l2
13
14
I!5
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of th
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 4th day of March
the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairman Erwin, Commissioners: Schlehuber,
Holmes, Savary, Noble & Hall.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
% 5zL
TOM ERWIN, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COh
ATTEST:
j
PLANNING DIRECTOR
-2- PC RES0 NO. 3358
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: City-wide within City of Carlsbad, County o
Diego.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Amendment to Chapter 21.40 of the Carlsbad Mur
Code to conditionaily allow off-site real estate sign;
accordance with recent State Legisiation.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described p
pursuant to the Guidelines for hpiementation of the California Environmental Quait
and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result c
review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant i
on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this ac
on file in the Planning Department.
A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the PI;
Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the
are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 3
of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Mike Grim in the PI
Department at 438-1 161, extension 4499. 7
DATED: JAVUARY 10,1991
CASENO: ZCA90-2
APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD
PUBLISH DATE: JANUARY 17,1991
/M L J. HOLZQILLI
-- / '%zc? PlanmyDirector
2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009-4859 (619) 43
c e
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART CI
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. ZCA 90-2
DATE:. JANUAR'
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: Offsite Real Estate Simaee
2. APPLICANT: Ciw of Carlsbad
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carisbad. CA 92008
(6191438-1 161
4. DATE EL4 FORM PART I SUBMITTED: December 20. 1990
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Amendment to Chapter 21.40 of the Carlsbad Mun
conditionallv allow off-site real estate simaae in ac
recent State Leaislation.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the Cit
Environmental Impact Assessment to detennine if a project may have a significant effect on thc
The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist.
identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the propor
provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an
lmpacr Report or Negative Declaration.
.' A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence tha
any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO"
ro indicate this determination.
* An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that ax
project may cause a sidcant effect on the environment. The project may qualify
Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects
insianificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings "YES-sig"
respectively.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be give
mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant.
0 0
PHYSICAL ENVlR0"T
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES
(s1g) (ins@
1. Result in unstable earth conditions or
increase the exposure of people or propew
to geologic hazards? - -
unique physical features? - - 2. Appreciably change the topography or any
3. Result in or be affected by erosion of soils
either on or off the site? - -
Result in changes in the deposition of beach
sands, or modification of the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the ocean or
4.
any bay, inlet or lake? - -
ambient air quality? - -
movement, odor, moisture, or temperature? - -
water (marine, fresh or flood waters)? - -
water, ground water or public water supply? - -
depletion of any natd resources? I -
10. Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy? - -
11. Alter a significant archeologicd,
paleontological or historical site,
5. Result in substantial adverse effecrs on
6. Resdt in substantial changes in air
7. Substantially change the course or flow of
8. Affect the quantity or quality of surface
9. Substantially increase usage or cause
structure or object? - -
-2-
0 0
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
YES YES WILL THE PROPOSAL DtRECIlY OR INDIRECTLY:
(insid (Sld
12. Affect the diversity of species, habitat
or numbers of any species of plants (including
trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic plants)? - -
13. tntroduce new species of plants into an area,
or a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? - -
14. Reduce the amount of acreage of any
agricultural crop or affect prime, unique
or other farmland of state or local importance? - -
15. Affect the diversity of species, habitat I
or numbers of any species of animals (birds,
land animals, all water dwelling organisms and insects? - -
Introduce new Species of animals into an
area, or result in a barrier to the
16.
migration or movement of animals? - -
HUMANENVIRONMENT
.YES (insis) YES (si@
WILL THE PROPOSAL D1RECI'L.Y OR INDIRECIZY:
17.
18. Substantially affect public utilities,
Alter the present or planned land use of an area? - -
schools, police, !ire, emergency or other public services? - -
-3-
0 0
HUMANENvlR0"T
YES YES
(Sld (tnsig) WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIREmY:
19. Result in the need for new or modified sewer
systems, solid waste or hazardous waste
control systems? - -
20. Increase existing noise levels? - -
21. Produce new light or glare? - -
22. Involve a signrficant risk of an explosion
or the release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to, oil,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? - 7
human population of an area? - -
for additional housing? - -
25. Generate substantial additional traffic? - -
26.
create a large demand for new parking? - -
23. Substantially alter the density of the
24. Affect existing housing, or create a demand *
Affect existing parking facilities, or
27. Impact existing transportation systems or
alter present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? - -
28. Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic? - 7
vehicles, bicyclists or pedes&? - -
emergency evacuation plans? I -
aestheticdy offensive public view? - -
existing recreational opportunities? - -
29. Increase traffic hazards to motor
30. Interfere With emergency response plans or
31. Obstruct any scenic vista or create an
32. Affect the quality or quantity of
-4-
0 0
MANDATORY FINDKNGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIREmLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES
bg) (Inslg)
33. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality
of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wild-
life species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or en-
dangered plant or animal, or eliminate
important examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory. - -
34. Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the dis-
advantage of long-term, environmental .
goals? (A short-term impact on the
environment is one which occurs in a
relatively brief, definitive period of
time while long-term impacts will
endure well into the future.) - -
Does the project have the possible
environmental effects which are in-
dividually limited but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively con-
siderable" means that the incremental
effects of an individual project are
considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and
35.
the effects of probable future projects.) - -
36. Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly? - -
-5-
0 0 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATlON
This Zone Code Amendment will change the restrictions in Chapter 21.40 of the Carlsbad M
conditionally allowing off-site real estate signage. This signage must have the permission of tl
which the sign is located and must adhere to the size requirements as listed in the Municipal Cc
amendment will not change the size restrictions of the signage, and signs will only be allov
property, no adverse environmental affects (including aesthetic impacts) are anricipared.
Physical Environment
1. -
5. - 8.
4. This amendment is purely administrative and does not approve or condone any e?
Since this Zone Code Amendment is not project specific and does not involve deve
kind, no impacts to air quality, climatological indices, or water flows or sources w
9. - 10. This solely administrative amendment will have no affects on any natural resol
reserves.
11. - 16. As this amendment to the Zoning Ordinance does not include or allow a
development, no impacts to historical, archeological, paleontological sites will resul
be any affect on flora or fauna in the City.
This Zone Code Amendment does not propose any changes in Iand use of an a
change the amount of signage allowed on any particular property.
18. - 19. Since no development is proposed with this amendment, there will be no affec
services including, but not limited to, utilities and sewer systems.
17.
20. - 22. As no site-specific development will be sanctioned through this amendment, t
There will also be no relea impacts to existing noise levels, light or glare.
substances or any risk of upset.
23. - 24. While this Zone Code Amendment allowing off-site real esxate signage might ha
on the marketability of real property, this affect will not impact the population de
supply.
25. - 30. This Zone Code Amendment does not involve any site-specific development and,
generate any traffic, affect any emergency response plans, nor create any traffic
Since the amount of signage per parcel is not changing through this men&
impacts to scenic vistas or public views will result.
As no development is proposed with this amendment, no recreational opport
affected.
See 11. - 16. above.
31.
32.
33.
-6-
e 0
34. - 35. There will be neither short-term nor long-rem affects to the environment because (
since it is purely administrative and does not involve any project development. p\
impacts will result either.
As no development is proposed, and no affect on aesthetics will result, no direct or in(
to human beings are expected.
36.
-7-
0 e
ANALYSIS OF WLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH AS:
a) Phased development of the project,
b) alternate site designs,
c) alternate scale of development,
d) alternate uses for the site,
e) development at some future time rather than now,
f) alternate sites for the proposed, and
g) no project alternative.
a) As no development is involved, no phasing or alternate scales of developme1
b) Since no site-specific development is proposed, alternate site designs, alte
the site, or alternate sites are relevant to this project.
c) See a) above.
d) See b) above.
e) See a) above.
f) See b) above.
g) The no project alternative would prevent the Carlsbad Municipal Code f
reflecthg State Legislation and is, therefore, not acceptable.
-a-
e w
DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department)
On the bask of this initial evaluation:
- X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a sigmficant effect on the environment, an(
DECLARATION will be prepared.
- 1 find that although the proposed project could have a sigmficant effect on the environm not be a sigruficant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an
sheet have been added to the project. A Conditional Negative
Declaration will be proposed.
- I hd the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENV IMPACT REPORT is required.
?'&A 4 J/ // i H //- ?/ , 144 , / /
I - /4/ 91
Date c di pL2ngfiector /
Date Signature 7 ,-
/e A(/ /k&*/.
LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE]
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE1
-9-
I 0
APPLICANT C0NCUR.RF.N CE WlTH MITIGATING MEASURES
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURE AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT.
Date Signature
c
MG
-10-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
lo
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
w 0
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3359
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
- CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A ZONE CODE AMENDMENT, AMENDING
TITLE 21, CHAPTER 21.41, OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL
CODE, REGARDING OFFSITE REAL ESTATE SIGNS.
CASE NAME: CITY OF CARLSBAD
CASE NO: ZCA 90-2
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 4th day of 1
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said re
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and COI
testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said
considered all factors relating to the Zone Code Amendment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
as follows:
A)
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the
recommends APPROVAL of ZCA 90-2, according to Exhibit "X", da
1992, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the follow
Findinps:
1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the various elements o
Plan.
The proposed amendment is consistent with the Citfs Local Coasta
The proposed amendment is consistent with recent amendments to
and 713 of the California Cid Code relating to real property for sa
2.
3.
....
....
....
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
W 0
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting oft
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 4th day of Marc
the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Erwin, Commissioners: Schlehuber
Holmes, Savary, Noble & Hall.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
% ,=zL-.-l%
TOM ERWIN, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISS
ATTEST:
Planning Director
-2- PC RES0 NO. 3359
w 0
1
!TI'AFIF REPORT (
DATE: MARCH 4,1992
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBTECT: ZCA 90-2 - OFFSITE REAL ESTATE SIGNAGE - Request for an amend1
to Chapter 21.41 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code to conditionally alloJ
placement of offsite real estate signage on private property.
I. REXOMMENlATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. :
recommending APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration issued by the Plar
Director and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 3359, recommei
APPROVAL of ZCA 90-2, based upon the findings contained therein.
II. PROJEm DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
On September 24,1990, the Governor of the State of California approved amendmei
Sections 712 and 713 of the California Civil Code relating to real property for sale *
These amendments preempt Carlsbad's local ordinance and conditionally allow
advertising real property for sale, lease, or exchange to be placed on property own
another party with that person's consent. This amendment to the Carlsbad Municipal
will incorporate the recent state legislation into local ordinance and further defir
conditions and restrictions relating to such offsite real estate signage.
Currently, Chapter 21.41 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code virtually prohibits si;
advertising merchandise or property for sale unless that signage is located on the prc
where the sale will occur. The only exception to this offsite signage prohibition is thf
wide kiosk program that conditionally allows offsite directional signage to resid
subdivisions of four or more units.
The proposed Zone Code Amendment would conditionally allow a property owner 01
agent to place a sign advertising that property for sale, lease, or exchange on the prt
of another, under certain provisions. These provisions, listed below, have been ad
conform to State legislation and to ensure compatibility of the signage wi
surroundings.
*
The provisions for the allowance of an offsite real estate sign are:
w e ZCA 92-2 - OFFSITE REAL ESTATE SIGNAGE
MARCH 4,1992
PAGE 2
1. That written consent be obtained from the owner of the property upon whic
sign is to be located;
That no other offsite real estate sign be located on the same property a
proposed real estate sign;
That the information on that sign be limited to the selling owners, or their ai
name, address, telephone number, and directions to the advertised property;
That the size of the offsite real estate sign not exceed the maximums defin
Section 21.41.070(4) for either the zoning of the advertised property o
property upon which the sign is placed, whichever is more restrictive;
That the sign conforms to all development standards of any applicable overlay
or special treatment area.
2.
3.
4.
5.
m. ANMYSIS
1. Is the proposed Zone Code Amendment consistent with the various elements t
General Plan?
Is the proposed Zone Code Amendment consistent with the goals and polic
Carlsbad's Local Coastal Program?
Is the proposed Zone Code Amendment consistent with recent legislation me
Sections 712 and 713 of the California Civil Code?
2.
3.
DISCUSSION
1. Consistenwwith the General Plan
An objective of the Land Use Element of Carlsbad's General Plan is to "preserv
neighborhood atmosphere and identity in existing residential areas." Another objecl
to develop and maintain suitable and adequate sign control for commercial and indi
areas. By restricting the size of the sign to the lesser of what is allowed by the zon
the advertised property or the sign location, whichever is more restrictive, compat
with existing signage requirements is maintained. Even though an onsite real estatl
for commercial property could be 25 square feet in size, an offsite real estate
advertising the same commercial property placed in an R-1 zone would be limitec
square feet to preserve the neighborhood atmosphere. Since the offsite signage wou
under restrictions of any applicable overlay zone, the proposed Zone Code Ament
does not conflict with the goals and objectives of the Scenic Highways Element.
W
ZCA 92-2 - OFFSITE & ESTATE SIGNAGE
MARCH 4,1992
PAGE 3
Any offsite real estate sign must be located out of any public or private right-of-was
well as located so as not to cause traffic hazards or significant visual impacts. TI
provisions are in keeping with the policies of the Public Safety and Circulation Elem
which call for the provision of adequate street safety.
Given that the signage must conform to the neighborhood with respect to size and 1
be located so as to not impair traffic, the proposed Zone Code Amendment is consk
with the various elements of the City's General Plan.
2.
Most of the 6 segments of Carlsbad's Local Coastal Program require that signage co
be implemented to ensure that visual resources are protected and preserved. The prop
Zone Code Amendment does not allow any increase in size for offsite real estate si@
and requires conformance of such signage to all applicable development standards,
as the those in the Village Design Manual. The amendment is therefore consistent wit
goals and intent of the Local Coastal Program.
Consistency with the Local coastal Pro!uam
3. Co&mcv with Sections 712 and 713 of the California civil Code
As discussed previously, the recent amendments to the California Civil Code relating tc
property for sale signs mandated that local jurisdictions provide for the offsite adver
of real property for sale, lease, or exchange. The legislation clearly states that
jurisdictions can still regulate or limit the display of signs within public or p
rights-of-way and determine the reasonable dimensions and design of such offsite sig
The proposed Zone Code Amendment prohibits placement of signs within any right-o
and defers to the existing restrictions on signage and design. By conditionallydowir
placement of signs, while regulating those areas still under local jurisdiction authorit
proposed Zone Code Amendment is consistent with the recent amendments to Section
and 713 of the California Civil Code.
Iv. E"MENTALREvrEw
Since the Zone Code Amendment does not condone any site specific developmen
would necessitate environmental review per the California Environmental Quality A all signage must be consistent with the current size restrictions mandated by the Ca
Municipal Code, the Planning Director has determined that no significant ac
environmental impacts will result from this proposal and has, therefore, issued a Ne
Declaration on January 10,1991.
W
ZCA 92-2 - OFFSITE k ESTATE SIGNAGE
MARCH 4,1992
PAGE 4
SUMMARY
Considering that the proposed Zone Code Amendment for offsite real estate sign:
consistent with the General Plan, Local Coastal Program, and Sections 712 and 712 f
California Civil Code, staff recommends approval of ZCA 90-2.
ATTACHMENTS
1.
2.
Planning Cornmission Resolution No. 3358
Planning Cornmission Resolution No. 3359
MG:lh:km
January 28, 1992
March 4, 1992 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 10
ioner Schlehuber inquired if the skilled nursing
y will accept Medical patients. Mr. McElliott
that it would not because Las Villas de Carlsbad is
ied as a private pay facility. He stated that Rancho
takes Medical patients.
Chairman Erwin adv
right of appeal wi
There being no other p
Commission on this top
testimony closed and o
10 years.
Negative Declaration issued by the
CUP 255(A), based on the findings and 8
conditions contained therein, including
stated in staff memo dated March 4, 199
to Condition #4 to state that a local f
must be paid prior to construction: and
Condition #6 to change the time period
10 year extensions.
RECESS
The Planning Commission recessed at 7:25 p.m. and reconvened
at ?:35 p.m.
5) ZCA 90-2 - OFFSITE REAL ESTATE SIGNAGE - Request for an
amendment to Chapter 21.41 of the Carlsbad Municipal
Code to conditionally allow the placement of offsite
real estate signage on private property.
Michael Grim, Assistant Planner, reviewed the background of
the request and stated that on September 24, 1990, the
Governor of the State of California approved amendments to
the California Civil Code preempting Carlsbad's local
ordinance and conditionally allowing signs advertising real
property for sale, lease, or exchange, to be placed on
property owned by another party with that party's consent.
Currently, Chapter 21.41 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code that
controls signage, virtually prohibits signage advertising
merchandise or property for sale unless that signage is
located on the property where the sale will occur.
exception to this offsite signage prohibition is the
City-wide kiosk program that conditionally allows offsite
directional signage to residential subdivisions of four or
more units.
The proposed Zone Code Amendment (ZCA) being considered
would conditionally allow a property owner or their agent to
place a sign advertising that property for sale, lease, or
exchange on the property of another under certain
provisions. Five provisions, which are detailed in the
The only
COMMISSIONER!
Erwin
Hall
Holmes
savary
Schlehubei
schramm
Noble
W
MINUTES 0
\
COMMISSIONER March 4, 1992 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 11
staff report, have been added to conform to State
legislation and to ensure compatibility of the signage with
its surroundings.
When analyzing the ZCA, staff considered its consistency
with the General Plan, Local Coastal Program, and the recent
amendments to the California Civil Code. Staff recommends
approval of the proposed ZCA because it was found to be
consistent with the General Plan and it conforms to the
objective of several elements as follows: - Land Use Element - The proposed ZCA preserves the
neighborhood atmosphere and identity in existing
residential areas and by developing and maintaining
suitable and adequate sign control for commercial and
industrial areas. By restricting the size of the sign to
the lesser of what is allowed by the zoning of the
advertised property or the sign location, whichever is
more restrictive, compatibility with existing signage
requirements is maintained.
* Scenic Highways, Circulation, and Public Safety Elements -
The proposed ZCA requires that offsite signs must conform
to all applicable overlay zones and be kept out of the
public or private rights of way.
* Local Coastal Programs - The proposed ZCA ensures that
visual resources are protected and preserved because it
does not allow any increase in size for offsite real
estate signage and requires conformance of such signage to
all applica5le development standards such as those in the
Village Design Manual.
* California Civil Code - The proposed ZCA conforms to
Sections 712 and 713 of the code by conditionally allowing
the placement of signs while regulating those areas still
under local jurisdiction authority, e.g. signage size and
placement outside of the right-of-way.
Commissioner Hall inquired if any of the real estate brokers
in town had been contacted about this matter. Mr. Grim
reported that they had not.
Commissioner Hall feels that if the industry has not had
notification or a chance to review and respond to the
proposed ZCA, he would have a problem going forth with it. Mr. Grim replied that they have had the public notification
which goes in the newspaper; however, there was no special
notice to the local board of realtors.
Commissioner Holmes believes that the real estate industry
keeps very close touch with what goes on in the City. Since
this was a noticed meeting, he would have no problem going
forth with it.
Commissioner Schlehuber doesn't think we should start a
precedent of targeting special groups. He thinks we should
go ahead with the hearing.
Karen Hirata, Deputy City Attorney, stated that the main
reason the amendment is being proposed is to conform with
State law. For that reason, she would suggest that it go
forth. If the Commission believes that the local real
estate board should be contacted, staff could notify them of
the date that it will be discussed at City Council.
Commissioner Savary believes that the proposed ZCA will be
an advantage to the real estate industry because they can
March 4, 1992 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 12
place onsite or offsite signs. Mr. Green replied that this
would definitely be an advantage to realtors.
Ms. Hirata commented that the State law was passed largely
as a result of the real estate lobby since many cities were
passing local laws which severely restricted sign placement.
This purpose behind the State law was to permit placement of
at least one offsite sign.
Commissioner Schramm can support the proposed ZCA because of
the State law as well as the fact that staff has stipulated
signage sizes that are consistent with the existing sign
ordinance.
Commissioner Noble can support it because he feels there is
sufficient notice to the public in the local newspapers. If
people are interested, they will make an effort to read the
newspaper.
Commissioner Schlehuber stated that he thinks he can support
it as well but will make a determination after he has heard
the public comment.
Chairman Erwin inquired if the only reason for proposing the
ZCA is to conform to the State law. Mr. Grin replied that
it is.
Chairman Erwin inquired if the maximum number of signs being
permitted is two per lot. Mr. Grim replied that that is
essentially correct. However, the code allows for
properties with high square footage to have several onsite
signs of specified dimensions. In any event, only one
offsite sign would be allowed.
Chairman Erwin opened the public testimony and issued the
invitation to speak.
There being no persons desiring to address the Commission on
this topic, Chairman Erwin declared the public testimony
closed and opened the item for discussion among the
Commission members.
Commissioner Hall inquired if the proposed ZCA meets only
the minimum State requirement with regard to a large
development. Mr. Grim replied that large master plans with
more than four units already have a provision for additional
signage through the City-wide kiosk program. They could
have up to six kiosk locations. The proposed ZCA only
applies to developments with less than four homes and the
single family homeowner. It would be especially helpful to
the person living at the end of a long cul-de-sac that wants
to sell his home. It would permit him to have a sign on
another property that is close to the traffic area.
Commissioner Schlehuber commented that, in effect, it would
legally allow people to do what they are already doing. Mr.
Grimm replied that he is probably correct; however, placing
open house signs at a corner in the right-of-way is, and
will continue to be, illegal.
Motion was duly made, seconded, and carried to adopt
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3358, recommending
approval of the Negative Declaration issued by the
Planning Director and adopt Planning Commission Resolution
No. 3359, recommending approval of ZCA 90-2, based upon
the findings contained therein.
COMMISSIONEF
Erwin
Hall
Holmes
Noble
Savary
Schlehub
Schramm
w
STATUTES OF im
0
Ch. 1281
resolution, makea it applicable in the county. This bill would not be operative ha any county de88 the board of supervisors, by
The people of the Stah of Califol.niCr do enact 08 foilowa.
SECTION 1. Section 68613.6 is added to the Government We, to read:
68543.6. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a retired judge who is at least 63 years of age may be assigned under thia section to sit in a court without loss or interruption of benefits provided by the Judges' Retirement System, if that service does not exceed in any fiscal year, a total of 70 working days or 560 hours for all assignments.
percent of the compensation of a judge of the court to which he or she is assigned. However, in no case, shall the compensation paid pursuant to this section in any fiscal year, when added to the retired judge's retirement allowance and all other compensation for service on assignment, exceed 92 percent of a superior court judge's annual compensa- tion. The assigned judge shall also be allowed expensea for travel, board, and lodging during the period of the assignment in accordance with rules adopted by the Board of Control which are applicable to officers of the state provided for in Article VI of the Constitution while trsveling on official state business. The state shall reimburse the Judges' Retirement Fund in the amount of the allowance which it has paid to the judge while sitting on assignment, and shall pay into the fund the 8 percent difference between the compensation of the retired judge while so wigned and the compensation of 8 judge of the court to which the retired judge is assigned. The reoeiving county shall pay the state 50 percent of the full salary of a judge of the court to which the retired judge is assigned for the time the judge serves the receiving court, together with the additional compensation and allowed expenaea required by thio section. If the county ia an option county, as defied in Won 77004, the amount due shall be paid IL~ provided in Section 77206.3. This section shall not be operative in any county until such time a8 the board of supervisors shall, by resolution, make thh section appiicable in the county.
0 In addition to regular retirement benefits, a retired judge while so sitting shall be paid 92
REAL PROPERW-FOR SALE SIGNS
CIUPTEB 1282
AB.No. 2949
AN ACT to amend WOM 712 d 713 of the Cia coda re- to red PrOPUtY.
[Approved by Governor September 24,1990.1 wed with kretuy of Stab Saptmber 26,199o.J
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIG=
AB 2949, Harris. Signs: real propeuty srier.
Existing law gives omem of real property the right to dbpby. prercn'bed 8- advertising that the properfq is offd for sale, law, or exchange. E~iati~ law void contrary provisions in any deed granting fee title, purchare money 88cuLitp hment, or ordinance.
This bill would specify thot such a sign (1) may be displayed on the owner's properfy or, with consent, on the propertp of another, (2) may be reasonably located in plain view of the public, and (3) my additmdy adverthe directioao to the prom for sale, lerree, or exchange. The bill wouId not affect any authority of a pemn or lad pv-nu entity to regulate or limit the display of signa on public or prnate rightaof-way.
The peopls of the Statu of Californicr do enact aa fblk
SECTION 1. Section 713 of the Civil code is amended to rerd:
4720 MdiUMlDUeLull.~"dURWt-~~wrrYI***
w e
iSSSlee0 REGULAR SESSION Ch. 1283
712. Every provhbn contained in OF aWrwh affecting a gmnt of a fee in-t in, or purchrue money SeCUrity hetrument upon, real propem in thir stab herehfom or
owner or hh or her agent to display or have displayed on the red property or =5?i OLI re hereafter made, which purports b prohiiit or restrict the right of the
rowrty owned by another with that pemon's consent, a sign whxh reamnab5 E plain view of the public, and is of reaaonable dimensions and design advertising the
property for sale, lease, or exchange, or advertising directions to the property by the pype%y owner or his or her agent is void aa an unreasonable restraint &on the power o a ienabon.
This section shail operak retrospectively, 88 well as prospectively, to the full extent
A sign which conforms to the ordinance adopted in conformity with Section 713 shall be deemed to be of reasonable dimension and design pursuant to this section.
SEC. 2. Section 713 of the Civil Code is amended to red
713. Notwithstanding any provision of any ordinance, an owner of real property or his or her agent may display or have displayed on the owner's real property or on real
#per@ owned by another with that person's consent, a sign wm is reasoxk-i $ plain view of the public, and is of reaaonable dimensions and design, as determined by & cityt county, or cib and countyt advertising the following:
(a) That the property is for sale, leaae, or exchange by the owner or hia or her agent,
(b) Directions to the prope~t~.
@ The owner's or agent's name 8 O.
@ The owner's or agent's add re^ and telephone number.
Nothing in this section limits any authorita which a person or local governmental entity my have to limit or regulate the diaphy or place ment of a sign on I private or public
c that it may constitutionally operate retrospectively.
right-of-way. **
HORSERACING-PAL P00LREDISTRIBUTABLE MONEY
CHAPTER 1283
A.B.No. 3027
AN Acf to uILu#I Sedioaa MlS .d 1SUl oltb Bprincw d Profeaabas coda rdahg to
[Approved by Goventar September 24,1990.)
hOl%tnCin8.
wed with semtary of Stah September 25,199o.J
I LEGISLATWE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 3021, Floyd. Hornracing: parimutael pool,
Mting law, until January 1,1998, requires that 120 aapS after the clow of any horserecing meeting, any redistn%utabIe money in a parimutud pool from UIIClaimed Web u required tebe distributed in a certain manner. A specifisd portion of the money is- ta tba Californja Horse Racing Board to support renear& on matters
deporbd in= Fund, and another portion ia required to be distributed to a
web fund mtablished by the horsemen's organization.
Thir bill would require that 9096, instead of all, of the redistributable money be dttributed 126 days, instead of 120 daya affm thet cloee of the meeting. The bill would
~JO requim that 140 dayr after the claw of the meeting, any nnnaining rediatriitable mw is to be diatriiutd equally between the board and the homemen's weifare fund.
Adlltlrrr~"4rY~mmlwYllbrLIwYrYI*.. 4721
relating bo,
' and rat%* swarity, a certain portion k reqtlirdto be
-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
I*
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
w *
ORDINANCE NO. NS - 19 9
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA AMENDING TITLE 21 OF THE
CAFUSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE BY AMENDING CHAPTER
21.41 REGARDING OFFSITE REAL ESTATE SIGNAGE.
The City Council of %he City of Carlsbad, California does ordai
SECTION I: That Title 21, Chapter 21.41 of the Carlsbad Mu
is amended by the addition of the following as Section 21.41.030(8):
"(8) "Offsite real estate sign" means a sign placed on propert
that which is being advertised for sale, lease, or exchange."
SECTION 11: That Title 21, Chapter 21.41 of the Carlsbad Mu
is amended by the renumbering of Section 21.41.030(8) as Section 21.41.031
renumbering of the subparagraphs below it accordingly.
SECTION 111: That Title 21, Chapter 21.41 of the Carlsbad Mu
is amended by the amendment of Section 21.41.050(3) (E) to read as follo
"(E) Information regarding the sale, lease, exchange, or re
provided that no other real estate sign exists on or has received a permit to b
the lot."
SECTION IV: That Title 21, Chapter 21.41 of the Carlsbad Mu
is amended by the amendment of Section 21.41.070(4) (C) to read as folk
Except for signs advertising new subdivisions, as m
subparagraph (D) below, the total area of any real estate sign on a lot shall
the areas mentioned in Table 3 below:
"(C)
...
...
...
...
...
...
I
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
I'
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
w 0
TABLE 3
Zone of Lot
R-1, R-2, R-W, P-C with densities
corresponding to R-A through R-2
R-3, R-P, R-T, P-C with densities
less restrictive than R-2
Freeway service facilities regardless
of zone and all other property
Maximum Real Estate Sign Area for Lot
Three square feet
Twelve square feet
Twenty-five square feet
SECTION V: That Title 21, Chapter 21.41 of the Carlsbad MunkiF
is amended by the addition of Section 21.41.070(4) (E) to read as follows:
"(E) Nothing in this chapter shall prohibit any property owner or h
authorized agent from displaying one offsite real estate sign within the City ad\
the following:
(1) That the property is for sale, lease, exchange or rental by th
or his or her agent.
(2) Directions to the property.
(3) The owner's or agent's name.
(4) The owner's or agent's address and telephone number.
All off-site real estate signs must comply with the following cc
regulating the location, design and dimensions: The sign must be placed in pl
of the public, but, in no case, may the sign be placed in any private or public
way, nor shall the location of such sign cause any traffic hazards or significai
impacts. The maximum area of the sign shall not exceed the maximum real es
area allowed for either the zone of the advertised lot or the zone of the lot on M
sign is located, whichever is less."
SECTION VI: That Title 21, Chapter 21.41. of the Carlsbad MunkiI
is amended by the addition of Section 21.41.070(10) to read as follows:
"A sign displayed in violation of this section is declared to be
nuisance and subject to abatement pursuant to the provisions of this chapter an(
18.20."
...
...
-2 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
I-5
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
w 0
EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective thirty da
adoption, and the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance a
to be published at least once in the Carlsbad Journal within fifteen days after it
INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the Ca
day of , 1992, and thereafter Council held on the
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of said City Cour
, 1992, by the following vote, to wit: day of
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
ATTEST:
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk
(SEAL)
3
0 0
Carlsbad Journal
Decreed A Legal Newspaper by the Superior Court of Sun Diego Coun
Mail all correspondence regarding public notice advertising to
W.C.C.N. Inc. P.O. Box 230878, Encinitas, CA 92023-0878 (619) 753-654
Proof of Publication
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ss.
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO,
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the county aforesaid;
I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above er
I am principal clerk of the printer of the Carlsbad Journal, a newspaper of gener
published weekly in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, and whi
is published for the dissemination of locaI news and intelIigence of a genera1 charactt
newspaper at all times herein mentioned had and still has a bona fide subscription
subscribers, and which newspaper has been established, printed and published at regular i
said City of Oceanside, County of San Diego, State of California, for a period exceeding c
preceding the date of pub1
notice hereinafter referred tc
notice of which the annexe
copy, has been published iI
and entire issue of said news
in any supplement thereof (
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
OFFSITE ZCA REAL 90-2 ESTATE
SIGNAGE ing dates, to-wit:
NOTlCE IS HEREBY GWEN that the City Council of the City of CarlS- bad will hold a public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, Cal omia, at 6:M) P.+, on Tuesday,
s Ma$+, ,A, to consider a request for an amendment to Chapter 21.41 ofthe Carlsbad Municipal Code, to allow the placement of off-site real estate signage on private property. If you have any questions regard- ing this matter, please call Mike Grim in the Planning Deeadel, at 438-1161, ext. 4499. If you challenge the Zone Code Amendment in court, YOU may bel limited to raising only those issues raised by you or someone else at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspond- ence delivered to the City of CdS-
Anri 1 71
I certify under penalty of g
foregoing is true and correc
Carlsbad, County of San 1
California on
1
bad, City Clerk’s Office, at or Prior
to the public hearing. the Applicant: City of Carlsbad
CJ E813 April 23,1992 day of April CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
Cle
mc.m-tl
e e
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
ZCA 90-2
OFFSITE REAL ESTATE SIGNAGE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will h a public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Dr Carlsbad, California, at 6:OO P.M., on Tuesday, May 5, 1992, to conside request for an amendment to Chapter 21.41 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, allow the placement of off-site real estate signage on private property.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call Mike Grim in Planning Department, at 438-1161, ext. 4499.
If you challenge the Zone Code Amendment in court, you may be limited to rai! only those issues raised by you or someone else at the public hearing descr- in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carl: City Clerk's Office at or prior to the public hearing.
APPLICANT: City of Carl sbad PUBLISH: April 23, 1992 CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
. 0 0 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will
a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive (formerly
Avenue), Carlsbad, California, at 6:OO p.m. on Wednesday, March 4, 1992, to consid
request for an amendment to Chapter 21.41 of the Carlsbad Municipal Codt
conditionally allow the placement of off-site real estate signage on private property.
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the p
hearing. Copies of the staff report will be available on and after February 26,1992. U
have any questions, please call Mike Grim in the Planning Department at 438-1161,
4499.
If you challenge the Zone Code Amendment in court, you may be limited to raising
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice
written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or prior to the public hea
CASE FILE: ZCA 90-2
CASE NAME: CITY OF CARLSBAD
PUBLISH: FEBRUARY 20, 1992
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING COMMISSION
MG:km
c
. 0 0
(Form A)
TO: CITY CLERK’S OFFICE
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RE: PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST
Attached are the materials necessary for you to notice -
ZCA 90-2 - OFFSITE REAL ESTATE SIGNAGE
for a public hearing before the City Council.
I
Please notice the item for the council meeting of
Thank you.
MARTY ORENYAK 3/30/9
Assistant City Manager Da
. -;>
-.
1
I’ I” 7
62 ’
rl
* I.
'a
c
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 I
/ c
\
0 0
RESOLUTION NO. 92-124
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION FOR A ZONE CODE AMENDMENT TO AMEND TITLE 21 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE, SECTION
21.41, REGARDING OFFSITE REAL ESTATE SIGNAGE.
CASE NAME: OFFSITE REAL ESTATE SIGNAGE CASE NO: ZCA 90-2
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Munj
Code, the Planning Commission did, on March 4, 1992, hold z
noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider
request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearin
considering all testimony and arguments, examining the i
study, analyzing the information submitted by staff
considering any written comments recei,ved, the Planning Comm
considered all factors rel&ng to the Negative Declaratio
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by thc
Council of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and corr
2. That the findings and conditions of the P1
Commission Resolution No. 3358, on file with the City Cle
incorporated herein by reference constitute the findings
City Council in this matter and that the Negative Declarat
hereby approved.
.:.
... -.-.
*--
0.0
a**
...
4
1
*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e 0
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting
City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, on the
5th day of MAY , 1992, by the following vo'
wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Kulchin, Larson, Stanton, N.
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ATTEST:
ALET* LUTENKRANZ ,*ty>lerk 1
d &&
(SEAL) ..-
' -
-2-