10/09/58 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commission will either continue the public hearing or call for a new one. Mr. Maurice Jones, Pleasanton-Livermore Road, questioned the proposed zoning in the brown area between the railroad tracks. Mr. Boucher advised that this is proposed for apartment use andfurther stated that this area is outside pf the City limits and thus:'. is only a proposed use in the General Plan. Mr. Kenneth Durks, Pacific Gas & Electric, was present and stated that they had already presented their views and asked if the changes, which they requested, had been made. Chairman Wetherby stated that the changes had been made with one exception. Mr. Deetz asked if the agricultural zoning oP his property would prevent him from any more building, e.g. a warehouse. He was advised that the non-conforming provisions of the proposed ordinance would limit him in this regard. Mr. Ray Adams, Northern California Council of Outdoor Advertisers, protested the limitations placers on signs and their prohibition from the ordinance. The City Admini- strator indicated that the City Attorney had stated that they were included in "C!' and "I" zones, but with rigid restrictions. Mr. Adams repeated points contained in his letter of July 30, 1958. He indicated that they only requested fair treatment. Mr. Allen Anderson frrom the Municipal Tax Association, 1625 Russ Building, San Francisco, representing General Petroleum, Standard Oil Company, Shell Oil Company, etc., was present. He opposed the restrictions on signs in the zoning ordinance as follows: 1. Service stations - Signs may not be illuminated by colored lights. 2. No service stations across from schools, churches, or parks would be allowed to have illuminated signs. 3. Where a City street intersects with a State Highway, signs must be at least 500' from the corner. 4. No signs on the roof of a canopy and no pole signs will be allowed. Mr. Anderson asked the Planning Commission for a definition of signs. Mr. Adams suggested the Planning Commission study other cities which have ordinances regulating signs. Mr. Landon questioned whether the fact that other towns allow large signs. should have any bearing on Pleasanton's decision in this matter. Mr. John Sweeney, 425 Main Street, suggested that Pleasanton shouldn't restrict signs. Signs on service stations should also be permitted. Councilman Orloff asked how many families were planned per acre in the proposed resi- dential area as shown in the General Plan. He was advised that this would depend on the minimum lot size, terrain and other factors. .. - ,_ ~ ~ The public hearing was closed and a second public hearing was~set for October 23rd on motion of Commissioner Hanifen, seconded by Commissioner Lozano and approved by all Commissioners present. Under correspondence, a letter from the East Bay Metropolitan Planning Council was presented. As there was no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 10:30 P.M. until October 16, 1958• Secretary