PC 07/08/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

~ the pastors. He noted in meetings with the Pleasanton Ministerial ssociation, they have expressed their support for the City's desire to keep it free of sign lutter. He stated that the churches are most willing to comply with the size of the allowed b ners and any other conditions put forth by staff. He felt the Commission should be f of fear regarding any possible encroachment on the separation of church and state, noting that both Houses of Congress open with a prayer; that chaplains are in the military, hos itals, etc. He encouraged the Commission to approve the application. Mr. Erne n further stated the religious institutions have helped the Police Department with ce . things and that the Lynnewood Church is a member of the Chamber of Commerce. Chairman Hovingh noted when he was growing up in the Midwest very church had about a 4 ft. high sign noting the times of church services. He asked Mr. merson whether all or some churches nowadays have this type of sign. Mr. Emerson rep ed that his church does not, primarily because their church is on a busy street and people uld have a difficult time reading it anyway. He noted that this type of sign does not lend its If well except in smaller, more rural areas. In response to a comment from the audience that such a sign would be illegal, Mr. Swift said there might be some restrictions as to how much or what can be pu on such signs, but indicated they are not illegal. Mr. Emerson concluded his remarks by thanking the Commission fi r the opportunity to speak. THE PUBLIC HEARING W AS CWSED. Commissioner Mahern stated she has a different viewpoint of signa e and is a proponent of good signage. She felt as a service to the community good signs sh uld be displayed so people will know what is going on. She said she is supportive of a tive banners of good material, but not paper ones that get torn easily. She did not think at even if all the 30 churches in the area put up a banner that it would be offensive, but she might get concerned if the number reached 200. At this point, she could support the am ndment. ed about approval of the hich might prove r. Swift's remarks, he ignage, it might be could also go back to ed the amendment. Commissioner Wright stated he had been initially somewhat conce banners because of non-mainstream churches using them in a way detrimental to the community. After hearing all the comments and felt even if those churches should choose to put up some banner or better if they were allowed only four times a year, pointing out the the original Code. At this point, he changed his opinion and suppo tions were made of e signage they need. In e did not think that Commissioner McGuirk commented he felt the churches and organi individuals who have the right to go through the process of getting regard to the number of banners displayed by the various churches, Planning Commission Minutes July 8, 1992 Page 5