Laserfiche WebLink
Minutes <br />Planning Commission <br />August 26, 1987 <br />Mr. Swift presented the staff report recommending denial of the <br />proposal so that the sign program can be redesigned. <br />The public hearing was opened. <br />Martin Inderbitzen, 62 West Neal Street, represented the <br />applicant and reviewed the recent action of the Council in <br />approving the PUD, which included the prohibition of car ramps. <br />Mr. Inderbitzen reported that the Design Review Board approved <br />the proposal for Hacienda Motors which is substantially greater <br />than the Berkey proposal. It is unfair to indicate that an <br />established policy should be followed in these instances. Budget <br />and Avis have also been granted signs. Berkey is asking that his <br />signage be relocated from his existing business. Mr. Inderbitzen <br />presented renderings of the elevations of the proposed pylon <br />sign. <br />Commissioner Michelotti asked Mr. Inderbitzen if at the time the <br />property was purchased the applicant was aware Rosewood Drive was <br />to have monument signs rather than pylon. <br />Mr. Swift explained that a subcommittee of the Planning <br />Commission had worked with the owner of the Trammell Crow <br />property in conjunction with Val Strough and the signage policy <br />was made clear. Staff was not aware of any other auto <br />dealerships coming to the area at the time. <br />Chairman Lindsey said he was part of the committee that <br />considered signage for this development. They looked at sign <br />alternatives, including one pylon sign for each ownership. It <br />was not anticipated the Berkey site would be used for automobile <br />sales. It was not intended to restrict signage of other uses <br />that are similar to the ones considered at the time the signage <br />program was considered. <br />Mr. Inderbitzen believes they have demonstrated that their signs <br />would be done in good taste. <br />Commissioner Berger said there is no way to tell the name of the <br />dealership and she would prefer a product sign to be on the wall <br />rather than "Pleasanton." <br />Commissioner Michelotti stated she was on the Design Review Board <br />when the Avis sign was addressed. In an effort to remain <br />consistent, she could not support a pylon sign because the Avis <br />and Budget car signs are coming down in three years. <br />The public hearing was closed. <br />Commissioner Tarver objected to the pylon signs aesthetically and <br />stated the others mentioned will be taken down in three years <br />anyway. <br />Chairman Lindsey stated that as owners of a small retail center, <br />he has determined that signage is very important when done <br />properly. <br />- 6 - <br /> <br />