My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 05/13/1992
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1992
>
PC 05/13/1992
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/29/2017 4:25:38 PM
Creation date
5/25/2005 2:12:19 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
5/13/1992
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 05/13/1992
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />RZ-92-l. Citv of Pleasanton <br />Application to amend Section 18.74.120 of the Municipal Code t allow on Main Street <br />retention of certain non-conforming signs which have attained a "Historical" or <br />landmark significance and to allow directly illuminated projectin signs on Main Street. <br /> <br />Mr. Swift presented the staff report recommending approval of Ca RZ-92-1 subject to the <br />conditions of the staff report. He advised that a request from the C mmunity First National <br />Bank is what precipitated this amendment. <br /> <br /> <br />Chairman Mahem noted that it was her understanding that in the D ntown Guidelines that a <br />structure lost the privilege of having a monument sign change only i the tenant changed. <br />She questioned why the bank tenant is losing this privilege as the te cy had not changed. <br />Mr. Swift advised that this also holds true if a building is renovated; he noted that the bank <br />is also wishing to change the sign to different colors. <br /> <br />Commissioner Horan initiated a discussion regarding D.2. of the ft ordinance. He did not <br />think there is a particular historic theme in the downtown area, goin from modem to old in <br />various sections, and that the ordinance might read: "The sign has een designed according <br />to a distinct architectural period with the downtown architecture or e specific building. " <br />He also felt that D.3. should be modified to add the words" with th same owner of 15 <br />years or more. " <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />In response to Commissioner McGuirk's question, Commissioner H ran replied that the <br />Downtown Association is looking more at a block-to-block approach to the historic theme. <br />He felt the Downtown Association would not be in favor of the ordi ce change as <br />proposed by staff. <br /> <br />Chairman Mahem suggested that Commissioner Horan's modificatio to D.2. be further <br />amended to read: "The sign has been designed according to a distin t architectural period <br />with the downtown architecture or the architecture of the building. " <br /> <br />Mr. Swift advised that staff has no problem with the suggested chan es. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hovingh noted that eventually some of the signs that <br />"grandfathered" in under the change precipitated in D.3. in regard <br />language. <br /> <br />urrently exist will be <br />the "15 years or more" <br /> <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. <br /> <br />Bob Philcox, 749 Main Street, Pleasanton, President of Community irst National Bank, <br />stated the request for a sign change for the bank only applies to sig copy and color of the <br />sign; that the size of the sign would remain as it presently is. He p ssed out cards to the <br />Commission that depicted the new signage. <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />Minutes Planning Commission <br />May 13, 1992 <br /> <br />Page 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.