Burbank’s new historic sign preservation non-preservation ordinance non-ordinance

 

[This just in: Fronnie has a good story this afternoon about the council/email question, and with links to internal city memos on the topic. It’s worth a read.]

This agenda item tonight on the “historic” sign ordinance is such a total joke. The council has successfully crushed the thing down into complete uselessness:

 

FireShot Capture 29 - - http___burbank.granicus.com_MetaViewer

 

What kind of preservation ordinance is it when anyone who chooses to can refuse to abide by all of the protective rules simply by removing themselves from their application at any time they want?

Only in Burbank would this be considered a meaningful change in law. But in the real world it’s a total and complete sham. This dream Burbank concept of “incentivization only!” always leads to obvious crap and destruction.

What a joke this town is. They’ve already destroyed all of the good old signs here anyway — and often with the enthusiastic help of the City itself (such as what happened with Wanamaker’s Rents on Olive). This “sign ordinance” won’t even include neon signs! It refuses to, by express exclusion.

Remember, Burbank’s the same town that went completely apeshit when the LA County Board of Supervisors 20 years ago used a legal loophole to step in and save Bob’s Big Boy in Toluca Lake from landlord teardown.

“Never again!” they cried.

We’re not making this up. Ask the old Road Kings car group. It’s too depressing and infuriating a story for us to go into again, but in short, this is a really stupid and ignorant town with hardly anything left worth preserving.

No wonder nice stores don’t want to come here. Who would?

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

7 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

7 responses to “Burbank’s new historic sign preservation non-preservation ordinance non-ordinance

  1. Citizen Cane

    City Hall and the Burbank politicians see Bob’s Big Boy as another place to construct a 300 unit mega apartment complex. It is the perfect site for the city to build such a complex, a crowded congested area, poor approaches, very little on street parking, and close to existing large residential complexes. What better place to raise more tax revenue. Bob’s , despite its ability to attract tourists , it does not reach the potential of tax revenue for the city, line the pockets of our council members, and give a major building project to out favorite developer and those white unmarked envelopes for council members.

    • semichorus

      Hey … maybe we can put Bob’s right below a nice mixed-use complex! And then call it Big Boy City.

      No, Big Boy’s Sustainability City! That’s better. People can eat at Bob’s and then either bike downtown or go upstairs and sleep.

      Why didn’t we think of that earlier?

  2. Anonymous

    Anon 3 is right nothing is going to happen it was all policy. Rogers might get to pound his chest about the missing emails to the press though.

    • semichorus

      How come “policy” required the termination of the little guys for similar behaviors?

      But not the big guys….?

      It’s the little guys who squealed about this email abuse.

  3. chad

    If you eat at Bob’s then you should ride your bike after.

    • Carl

      I heard Rogers sold his suv and now rides a bike everywhere. They nicknamed him Sus_stainable Wilbwet.

      • semichorus

        Like Ed Begley Jr.?

        He can now call himself Will Rogers Jr. in emulation. He should have been doing that anyway.

Leave a Reply- (comments take a while to appear)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s