pf_03151 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

e e . - t~ .I ,,: '," Mr. Steve North Assistant City Manager City of Roseville Page 2 April 16, 1981 ordinance applies to those signs but, given the long period of time they have been in existence, I believe it will be extremely difficult enforce the ordinance as to those signs. 3. Signs erected prior to the 1974 recodification, which were legal at the time of erection, but which became nonconforming by reason of the 1974 recodification, would be allowed to continue indefinitely, or until such time as the use is intensified. The 30 month period to remove nonconforming signs, quoted above, does not apply to the 1974 recodification. 4. Signs erected after the 1974 recodification which are in violation of those code provisions, technically could be removed by the City at this time. It is possible, however, depending upon what judge would hear the case, that even though those signs are found to be illegal, because the City had no.t enforced the ordinance for a number of years, that the court would allow those signs to continue. The City's ability to enforce the ordinance as to those signs would be dependent upon the individual facts of each case and the leanings of the judge that hears the case. Because of the number of different criteria which apply depending on the date of erection and because the City does not have records concerning the erection dates, it is my opinion that it will be very difficult for the City to uniformly enforce its code as it applies to nonconforming signs. Given the limited number of such nonconforming signs, it would be reasonable for the City Council to choose to grandfather all signs existing on a given date in 1981, and thereafter strictly enforce the sign code as to new signs. . If the Council chooses such an approach, it could either allow the nonconforming signs erected prior to the date in 1981 indefinitely or until they are removed or intensified, or, in the alternative, could allow them but require that they be removed by a certain date. Proposed ordinance language for those alternative approaches follows: "Any nonconforming use of land involving a sign erected prior to , 1981, may be continued." or, in the alternative, "Any nonconforming before period of removed." use of land involving a sign erected , 1981, may be continued for a months, by which time it must be