HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1997 0618 CC REG ITEM 09HAgenda Report
City of Moorpark
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM: Paul Porter, Senior Planne�
Nelson Miller, Director of Community
�. /,.
ITEM
9.
DATE: June 5, 1997 (CC meeting of June 18,.1997)
SUBJECT: CONSIDER LETTER REGARDING REMOVAL OF "OPEN HOUSE" REAL
ESTATE SIGNS WITHIN THE CITY'S PUBLIC RIGHT -OF -WAY
On May 30, 1997, the City received the attached letter dated May
28, 1997, from Alan Hollaar of Troop Real Estate Company in Simi
Valley who stated that on many occasions, their "open house" real
estate signs have been taken by an employee of the City. Mr.
Hollaar suggests that any signs be picked up after 5:30 p.m. and
that signs being up for three (3) hours on a Sunday afternoon will
not pose any hardship on the aesthetic appeal of the City.
Chapter 17.40.120 A3 of the Municipal Code regulates "Temporary
Open House Signs" and states:
A nonilluminated sign on private property, of a size not
greater than four (4) square feet and four (4) feet in height,
may be placed at a rate of one (1) per company, per home, per
intersection, for a period from nine (9:00) a.m. to eight
(8:00) p.m. on the day of the open house; provided, that there
shall be only one (1) route designated by signs to a
particular open house. No more than four (4) directional open
house signs shall be placed within the city limits for any one
open house on any one day. Temporary open house signs are to
be located on private property, written permission must be
obtained from the property owner in order to install a
temporary sign on private property. Such signs shall be
erected and removed on the same day the open house is held and
shall not be fastened or attached in any way to a building
facade or architectural element or any street fixture or
C: \M \SIGN \18JUN97.CC 1
City Council Agenda Report (June 18, 1997)
"Open House" Signs in Public Right -of -Way
Page No. 2
placed within the right -of -way.
Chapter 17.40.090(T) of the City Municipal Code (Sign Requirements -
Prohibited Signs) prohibits any sign erected within a public right -
of -way, except as permitted by Section 17.40.150 (Downtown sign
regulations) . In addition, signs for government and public utility
companies may be located within the public right -of -way.
The City has been removing signs including "open house" signs
within the public right -of -way on the basis that they are not
permitted pursuant to the City's Sign Code and that signs in the
public right -of -way may interfere with, obstruct, confuse or
mislead traffic. In addition, there is the concern that they
impede access to public sidewalks and may preclude use of some by
disabled individuals, may damage public landscaping and irrigation
systems as well as the general concern with liability.
Direct staff as deemed appropriate.
Attachment: Letter from Alan Hollaar dated May 28, 1997
C: \M \SIGN \18JUN97.CC 2 p
QW3.1 Q
ALAN HOLLAAR
12565 Spring Creek Road
Moorpark, CA 93021.
(805) 529 -3249
May 28, 1997
RE: REAL ESTATE "OPEN HOUSE" SIGNS
Dear Moorpark City Council:
RECEIVED
MAY 3 0 1997
CRY OF MWR
A A
�E
85A�
I am a realtor at Troop Real Estate Co. in Simi Valley. Between myself and my partners, Jim &
Sue Butler, we have, on many occasions, had our "open house" signs taken by an employee of the
City of Moorpark. This situation has become very frustrating.
The three of us are area residents, local taxpayers, and have been for many years. On Sunday
afternoons we hold open houses. This is a part of our job, and is also a commitment that we make
to our clients. I am sure that if and when any of us is in a position of having to or wanting to sell
our homes, we would like to have the maximum number of people, who are in the home - buying
market, come through our home in hopes of obtaining a buyer. Getting a buyer to these homes
requires a sign announcing the open house, and leading.a prospective buyer to that home.
Therefore, the sign is necessary and performs a vital function to our mutual goal.
This might be analogues to, for instance a secretary having to perform a task without a typewriter,
a policeman performing a job without a ticket book, or patrol vehicle, or an engineer calculating
without a calculator. The job can be done without those items ... but not efficiently.
In my case, having the signs picked up by a city employee with too much time on his hands, stops
the potential home buyer from visiting the home which is on the market. Not only does this keep a
taxpayer from obtaining a potential buyer, but it also keeps me from making any money. On
Sunday afternoons when our city employed personnel are out at out state maintained beaches, or
parks, or other points of interest, I am spending my time away from my family, trying to make
some money to provide for my family -- and to be able to pay taxes for these city employed
workers.
This situation would be the same as if the typewriter, the ticket book, the patrol vehicle or the
calculator were taken from that employee and that employee were sent home - without making any
money for the day. I am sure that the taxpayer would hear an outcry from that employee, yet the
employee has absolutely no qualms in doing the same thing, to what is in effect, his employer!
Today, a statement was made that perhaps the signs were on public property. Perhaps so, in that a
sign would obviously have to be put on a traveled comer in order to obtain potential buyers.
However, that public property is also paid for by myself..... and the homeowner whose home we are
trying to sell. Therefore, a sign placed on a corner for a couple of hours should not pose any threat
to the community. If only we could proudly point to our other public resources being as actively
cared for ... and city budgets overseen as wisely ( "I"
i
RECEIVE®
�- - X21997
i
C;t,% Oi %1,- rpdfk
Now, on several occasions, my signs have been taken by a city employee. As the afternoon
progresses, I often noticed things were getting.slower for traffic through those homes.. After I
closed the home - and went to pick up my signs, and found they were gone - I also noticed other
real estate signs were still up. I perceive this to be discrimination, or at the very least harassment.
In the future, I will look for all signs to be picked up ... and if there should be any remaining after
mine are picked up, I will assume that this harassment is continuing.
In the future, may I suggest that the city employee, whose job it is to pick up signs, do so after 5:30
P.M. At that point there will be no signs up, as we are all very responsible citizens and will have
the signs removed ourselves. I think that the signs being up for 3 hours on a Sunday afternoon
will not pose any hardship on the esthetic appeal of our lovely city.
i
S' ly
Alan Hollaar
QOOIZO