|
is planned for this area in the near future, and it ie his intention to use the
<br />sign to advertize it as well as the Mission Park development, which, at present,
<br />does not have an easily recognizable means of identification. Mr. Randall, of
<br />Blaze Neon, designer of the subject sign, was also present in the audience. There
<br />being no further comments from the audience, it was moved by Commissioner Lozano,
<br />seconded by Com<nieaioner Rega, that the public hearing be closed. Mr. Fales, in
<br />giving the staff report, stated that according to Sections 10.202, 17.703 and
<br />17.706 of Ord. No. 309, the proposed sign does not meet the regulations of the
<br />Ordinance with relation to its free-standing aspect, direct illumination, setback
<br />and maximum height. The staff wonders if the Ordinance, when written, took into
<br />account thin type of neighborhood commercial area. The general practice today
<br />theaetreetgadvertizingca118ofhthe tenantaovi~eaetaff fealaithatithiatiec8upo11cyr
<br />amend theaZo ingl0rdinancelindthie regard e~IfPa Varianceeforsheightbiatgranted,
<br />1t will set a precedent. Mr. Randall, of Blase Neon, stated that moat current
<br />ordinances of other cities puC this type of sign lighting in the same category
<br />as indirect illumination, as the lighting is diffused lighting. HenalsAfterlcon-d
<br />that the proposed revolving aspect is different from a flashing elicant and
<br />eiderable discussion by the Commission, staff, City Attorney, app
<br />designer, upon motion of Commissioner Lozano, seconded by Commissioner Rega, the
<br />following resolution was adopted by unanimous vote of those Commissioners present:
<br />RESOLUTION N0. 284
<br />WHEREAS, the application of Wm. J. Jacobson, P.O. Box 88, Pleasanton,
<br />fora Variance from Section 17.706, Ord. No. 309, in order
<br />to allow installation of an advertizing sign 47 feet in height upon
<br />Lot 1, Tract No. 2517, 5302 Sunol Blvd., in a C-N District, has come
<br />before thin Commission;
<br />NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
<br />1. The above-named Variance ie hereby granted subject to
<br />the following conditions:
<br />a. Said sign may be afree-standing sign.
<br />b. Said sign shall have only diffused illumination
<br />c. Said sign shall be set back at least 42 feet from
<br />the frontage road along Sunol Blvd.
<br />d. Said sign must be stationary and may not revolve.
<br />e. Said sign may not exceed 40 feet in height, with a
<br />maximum 7 feet additional height devoted to unlit
<br />design detail.
<br />Chairman Landon requested the staff to accumulCommi.esion in aigstudyisession f
<br />other cities to be considered by the Planning
<br />Mr. Randall offered to lend any assistance the Comsdsaion might desire.
<br />Chairman Landon opened the public hearing on the application of D 6 V Builders,
<br />Inc., 6000 Telegraph Ave., Oakland, for a Conditional Use Permit in order to
<br />install a tesporary tract sign southeast of the intersection of Black Ave. and
<br />gopyard Road, in an R-1 District. Mr. Dudley Frost was present in the audience.
<br />There being no comment from the audience, it was moved by Commissioner Rega,
<br />seconded by Commissioner Lozano, and tattled, that the public hearing be cloned.
<br />Mr. False, in giving the staff report, stated the application is for installation
<br />of a 6 ft.x17 ft. sign in an interim (A) zone which is being rezoned to C-N. How-
<br />ever, tract eigr..s are not a rermitted use in either of these zones. Therefore,
<br />the ataft considers the sign will be erected in the adjacent R-1 zone. The staff
<br />recommendG gran..*.ing o. the Conditional Uae Per-nit wit: a Cime limit set by the
<br />Comalesion, and that the s;.gn shall be erected in the R-1 zone and conform to the
<br />required setback. After discussion by the Couro~iesian, staff, applicant and City
<br />Attorney, the Commission considered that because or prev4.ous approval of the area
<br />in question as a Planned Unit Development un3er the terms of Ordinance No. 309,
<br />approval for tract sign installation in a C-N D13~rict in this instance should be
<br />granted. reaolutionnwas ado~ptediby unani~`eavoteeofbthoee~Casmmisei neranpreaent:
<br />following
<br />
|