Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council remands proposed code change to allow rotating auto display platforms to planning commission
Summary
After a public hearing and questions about safety, visual impacts and the number of potential rotating car displays, the Claremont City Council remanded a proposed ordinance clarifying that 'carousels' would be allowed in the Commercial Freeway zone subject to a Special Use and Development Permit and asked the Planning Commission to study a cap (suggested range: three to six).
The Claremont City Council on Feb. 10 remanded a proposed municipal‑code amendment that would clarify the legal status of rotating auto display platforms — sometimes called carousels — in the city’s Commercial Freeway (CF) zone and asked the Planning Commission to return with recommendations about a numeric cap and additional public input.
Assistant Planner Daniel Kim summarized the staff proposal to amend Title 16 (special use/development permits) and Title 18 (sign code) so carousels would not be categorically prohibited in the CF zone but would require SUDP approval and comply with existing lighting, banner and nuisance standards. Staff proposed limiting carousels to a maximum of two per business/property and a maximum height of 30 feet, with each installation subject to project‑level review and, if warranted, CEQA analysis. “Approval tonight would not approve the moving signs themselves,” Kim said; instead, it would allow future proposals to be considered via SUDP review.
Council members and members of the public raised questions about how many such displays could appear along the freeway corridor (staff estimated up to 18 signs in the theoretical worst case), traffic distraction, lighting and visual impacts to nearby neighborhoods, whether dealers had been engaged, and what enforcement or permit‑revocation tools staff would use if aesthetics or safety became problems. Planning Commission Chair Isaac Grama confirmed that no dealerships attended the commission hearing that forwarded the recommendation.
Several council members asked staff to return with a clearer limit. A motion to remand the ordinance to the Planning Commission for further study — including analysis of a cap in the 3–6 range and direct outreach to interested dealerships so that applicants could present data and renderings — carried by voice vote.
The council did not adopt the ordinance at first reading; instead, the remand will give the Planning Commission time to weigh cap options, expected sign counts, and community input before any second reading and adoption. Staff said that, if the ordinance proceeds without further modification, a second reading had previously been tentatively scheduled for Feb. 24, but the remand will alter that timeline.
Council members emphasized that SUDP review provides project‑level discretion — permitting staff to condition, limit or revoke approvals — and that any future carousel installation would be subject to specific aesthetic, safety and CEQA review as required.
