Flashy and informative signs have dominated tourist areas and downtowns in an obvious attempt to attract business. So where is Fullerton’s electronic sign inviting commerce? With the sign moratorium being voted on today, we may never see it.
Last month, business owner Naeem Niamat wanted to upgrade the company’s old static sign for an electronic sign that allows the user to customize messages and advertise daily events, sales, and specials. According to one city official and supported by the Planning Commission meeting’s archived video, Fullerton staff tried in vane to derail and deny the new sign from the moment the application hit City Hall. The Planning Commission voted to continue the matter so that staff can define what conditions might be necessary for safe operation of the sign.
So why did the staff, represented by staff planner Christine Hernandez, try to shut this project down before it even went before the Planning Commission? To answer that question, we need only to go back to November 2008 when the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC-08-52 which declared the Commission’s intention to amend Title 15 of the Fullerton Municipal Code. However, in a City Council Agenda package (Agenda Item #21, June 15, 2010) for PRJ10-00556 dated June 12, 2010, Planning Manager Al Zelinka and Community Development Director John Godlewski admit that staff dropped the ball saying, “Due to other staffing priorities, work on the ordinance amendment was not immediately pursued.” What some may claim as transparency, I see as an opaque admission of poor management and staffing oversight.
I am certain this matter would not have come to light if there was anyway for staff to burry it. Perhaps that is why they didn’t invite the applicant or his consultants to meet and discuss concerns. Instead of putting the sign ordinance amendment issue on the Council agenda when the applicant first filed for the permit, staff tried to run roughshod over the business owner figuring he would bow his head and walk out of City Hall as another defeated property owner. But that backfired when the Planning Commission voted down requiring CEQA findings and decided to table the matter pending review of reasonable conditions placed on the permitted use as may be recommended by city staff.
Fast-forward to tonight’s Council meeting and Agenda Item #21. Staff recommends grandfathering Mr. Niamat’s application while implementing an electronic message board sign moratorium on all other applicants until the matter can be fully addressed in with amendments to the Fullerton Municipal Code. What will Council do? I would imagine 3 out of 5 members will roll over and give staff what they have asked for, albeit nearly 2 years too late. How many other tasks have fallen through the cracks of City Hall?
No comments:
Post a Comment