HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes-02-07-77-Adjourned Regular MeetingMINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETSVG
FEBRUARY 7, 1977
The City Council of the City of Downey held an adjourned regular meeting at
5:30 p.m., February 7, 1977, in the Council Chamber of the Downey City Hall, Mayor
Hazel. N. Scotto presiding.
PRESENT: Council Members:
William L. Greene
Richard M. Jennings, Mayor Pro Tem
Kenneth J. Miller
Theodore H. Jackman
Hazel N. Scotto, Mayor
ALSO PRESENT: Charles W. Thompson, City Manager
Ervin Spindel, Director of Community Development
William A. Goggin, City Planner
Robert L. Shand, City Clerk -Treasurer
Mayor Scotto announced the purpose of the meeting is for a study session on
the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance regarding signs and any other business to come
before the City Council.
Mr. Goggin explained per Council's request certain changes were made in the
proposed sign section of the ordinance, and he commented other changes have been
made to clarify identification marks throughout the section. He mentioned anyone
reading this section will know the City will not go for flamboyant signs.
Councilman Jackman requested the Council consider each section and make a
decision.
The Council then discussed revised Part 9146, Sims, dated January 31, 1977.
Mr. Thompson suggested the following changes in Section 9146.02 for clearer
reading: Second sentence beginning with "Signs give us", change to "Signs provide";
in the third sentence strike "all of our"; and in the fourth sentence strike "We
find that" and change to "It is determined to be in the best interest...".
Section 9146.02: Approved as suggested by the City Manager.
Section 9146.04: Sub -sections (1), (4),(3), and (5) were approved; sub -section
3 was eliminated.
Section 9146.06(i): Per request of Councilman Jackman, "after an established
period of 90 days" was deleted.
For the Council's consideration, Mr. Goggin reviewed Section 9146.06, noting
an addition of (2a) for defining Architectural Projection, and amendments to the
following sub -sections: (7), substitution of a word; (8) and (9), the deletion of
the first word "building"; (17), deletion of last two lines; (26), deletion in
last two lines of "standard name brand"; and (38), deletion of "building" in fourth
line.
Section 9146.08: Councilman Jackman suggested substitute wording for sub-
section (3) as recommended in Appendix E of the letter from the Downey Chamber of
Commerce dated November 10, 1976.
A discussion was held regarding blinking and scintillating signs.
A speaker from the audience commented regarding the effect fuel shortage would
have on blinking signs.
A discussion was also held regarding the size of signs in the City.
Mr. Larry Hoag suggested the ordinance define signs that glare.
Councilman Jennings asked that sub -section (3) be set aside for later discus-
sion. Referring to sub -section (5), he pointed out there are establishments in
the City where a tenant still has a lease on the building but has vacated the
premises. He said in this case, he does not feel the advertising signs should be
removed.
Council Minutes 2/7/77 (adjourned) -1-
-136
Jfs
Sixty days was established as the period of time a person may advertise his
new location of business; then the wording on the sign must be blanked out.
In sub -section (8), Mr. Spindel suggested the word "chapter" be changed to
"code".
In sub -section (16), the first sentence was deleted; the second sentence was
added to sub -section (5).
Mr. Goggin continued with his review of Section 9146.08. Balloons and other
inflated or tethered objects were included in sub -section (9). It was suggested
by Mr. Goggin and so noted that the first sentence in sub -section (16) be deleted;
the second sentence was added onto sub -section (5).
Mr. Goggin suggested changing "25 watts" in sub -section (17)(f) to ,4o watts".
Mr. Goggin commented on Section 9146.10, noting a change in the wording in
sub -section (1)(a). In discussing the height of real estate signs, sub -section (1)
(b), he said a "sold" sign will have to be mounted on the face of a real estate
sign.
Councilman Jennings asked that the following sentence be deleted from
sub -section (1)(b): "The words 'for sale, lease or rent' shall be the largest
letters on the sign." He then requested that on line one, page 252, deleting
"signs shall be removed within 21 days after sale" and changed to read "to the
close of escrow".
Councilman Jackman agreed.
Mr Hoag preferred the height of six feet for real estate signs in a residen-
tial area. He suggested not more than one attached sign be allowed on a real
estate sign.
Councilman Miller objected to the length of time real estate signs are posted
The Council agreed with 60 days.
Discussion was held regarding real estate signs and the accompanying "sold"
signs.
Mr William Cole commented on the amortization of signs.
Sub -section (1)(b), Real Estate Signs, on page 251, line 15, will become
sub -section (2)(a); sub -sections (1)(c) and (d) will become (b) and (c).
Mayor Scotto declared a recess at 7:30 p.m. The meeting resumed at 7:45 p.m.
with all Council Members present.
The Council concurred with the request to delete the last sentence in sub-
section (1)(a), line 12; also, in sub -section (1)(b), line 20, the words "single
post" were deleted; on line 23, delete the sentence beginning with the word "stake".
The Council also concurred with Councilman Jennings'request to delete "The
words 'for sale, lease or rent' shall be the largest letters on the sign" from
sub -section (1)(b).
Councilman Greene made a formal complaint regarding the constant display of
"sale" signs at the F & J Shoe Store.
Mr. Goggin said that is in a C-4 zone and there is no control over advertising
in C-4. He then commented on sub -section (3), Political Signs, and the corrections
made on lines 18 and 19.
Referring to Window Signs, Section 9146.10, sub -section (1)(d), Councilman
Miller favored permitting a window sign to advertise the opening of a business and
also permitting the business to advertise its grand opening. He was informed that
this is included in the ordinance.
It was then requested that sub -section 9146.10(1)(d) be cross-referenced with
sub -section 9146.08(5).
At the request of Councilman Jennings, line 3 in sub -section 9146.10(3)(b)
was deleted. Councilman Jennings then questioned the enforcement of sub -section (c)
and said the person responsible for the posting of a political sign on vacant pro-
perty should file with the City an agreement with the property owner permitting the
posting of that sign.
Council Minutes 2/7/77 (adjourned) -2-
A speaker in the audience suggested this section be rewritten by the City
Attorney.
Mr. Spindel suggested establishing a procedure of enforcement by the City if
signs are not removed seven days after the election.
Councilman Jackman also suggested the Council have the section rewritten to
its satisfaction and then reviewed by the City Attorney
Mr. Goggin mentioned sub —section (c) will be rewritten to require that the
individual responsible for posting political signs must obtain and file with the
City written permission.
Discussion followed regarding enforcement of removal of political signs seven
days after an election.
Mr. Spindel suggested there could be enforcement through Section 5300 of the
Downey Municipal Code.
Mr. William Cole pointed to a possible repetition in sub —section (b), lines 2
and 11, where it states, "signs shall not exceed 32 square feet".
Discussion continued with Section 9146.12. On line 24, under sub —section (1),
"except non —permit signs" should be changed to "except non —permit and outdoor
advertising signs".
Mr. Goggin stated concern regarding posting of political signs in commercial
and industrial zones, Section 9146.10, sub —section (j)(c). He said as it now
stands, on vacant property the candidate must obtain written permission from the
owner and file it with the City.
Councilman Jackman asked that the written permission also apply in the resi—
dential zone pertaining to R-1 vacant property under sub —section (a).
The Council concurred that all vacant land and buildings should be included.
The Council also requested that in Section 9146.14, sub —section (1), "changing
signs" be more clearly defined.
Discussion ensued regarding "free standing signs on property of 150 feet",
contained in Section 9146.14, sub —section (4)(a)l.
Councilman Jennings said this would be discriminating to the businesses that
do not have 150 feet of property.
A property frontage of 75 feet was suggested.
Discussion followed regarding signs and setbacks.
A member of the audience suggested more consideration be given toward setbacks
of property rather than 150 foot frontages.
Another member of the audience suggested permitting merchants to combine the
frontages of their property in order to install one pole sign between them. This
would then eliminate the 150 foot requirement.
Mr. Goggin asked that any other suggestions be submitted to him for considera—
tion. He then reviewed sub —section (4)(a)2 and recommended a change in sub —section
(4)(b), line 15, wherein "maximum area of 20 square feet" should be "42 square
feet", and "maximum height of 16 feet" should be "20 feet", which will be
consistent with the other limitations listed on page 258, lines 21 and 22 and what
is allowed elsewhere throughout the ordinance. Responding to questions, he noted
that in sub —section (4)(c), the free standing sign is for a single business.
Councilman Jennings questioned the amount of copy that can be displayed on a
sign.
It was moved by Councilman Greene and seconded by Councilman Jackman to adjourn
the meeting as soon as the subject under discussion is settled.
Conversation was held regarding sub —section (4)(c), page 259, and monument
signs vs. free standing signs.
A speaker from the audience asked that 50 percent copy be allowed on a monu—
ment sign.
Council Minutes 2/7/77 (adjourned) —3—
Councilman Jennings inquired whether there is any difference between a
monument sign and a pole sign.
Mr. Coggin replied a monument sign is a ground sign with a foundation, and a
pole sign is a free standing sign.
Councilman Jennings suggested there be established in sub -section (4)(c) a
maximum amount of subject matter permitted on the signs, which would be a percent
of the total.
Discussion ensued.
The Council reauested Mr. Goggin to add "subject areas not to exceed 70
percent of the total sign" to sub -section (4)(c).
Referring to Section 9142.22, sub -section (2)(a), Mr. Hoag requested clarifi-
cation of the wording that could be placed on a sign in the R-3 zone.
Mr. Goggin responded that it would be a sign identifying the name or address
of the building.
Mr. Hoag favored permitting gallow signs in a R-3 zone showing whether there
is a vacancy, who to contact, and the telephone number.
Councilman Miller suggested that a sign in a residential area include only
information the property is available and a telephone number. He also suggested
commercial advertising not be permitted in a R-3 zone.
The next study session was set for 5:30 p.m., February 15, 1977, in the
Council Chamber of the Downey City Hall.
There being no further business to come before the City Council, the meeting
was adjourned at 9:28 p.m.
45
Robert L. Shand, City Clerk -Treasurer Hazel N. Scotto, Mayor
Council Minutes 2/7/77 (adjourned) -4-