Laserfiche WebLink
Item 6b <br />AP-96-05 {PUD-85-8-SD-11VIL McDonald's Corporation <br />Appeal of the PLanning Commission's denial of Case PUD-85-8-SD-1M. an application for <br />a major modification to an approved develonment plan to allow the installation of a logo <br />sign On the front f~c~de of the Wa!Mart building located at 4501 Rosewood Drive. Zonina <br />for the property is PUD-MCOIPD (Planned Unit DevelOpment - Mixed Commercial Office <br />Industrial Planned Development) District. (SR96:215) <br /> <br /> Brian Swift presented the staff report. <br /> <br /> Mayor Tarver declared the public heating open. <br /> <br /> Drew Bardet, McDonald' s Corporation, 2480 North First Street/1220, San Jose, indicated <br />he had made a presentation to the Hacienda Business Park Owners Association in May. He <br />showed photographers of signs on other WalMarts in the Bay Area. Usually WalMart includes <br />processing of the sign at the beginning of processing the PUD application and he did not know <br />why that did not occur in Pleasanton. He indicated McDonald's is in all the WalMarts <br />nationwide. He concurred with the staff report and asked for Council's approval. <br /> <br /> Steve Sherman, 475 1 Sutter Gate Avenue, added that other signs appear around the entire <br />WalMart building. The proposed McDonald's sign is in the middle range of the size of those <br />signs. He believed the five foot letter was consistent with the main WalMart sign and he felt <br />it would be more consistent from an aesthetic point of view. However, McDonaid's would <br />accept the three foot lettering. <br /> <br /> Jack Hovingh, 4250 Muirwood Drive, requested Council to uphold the Planning <br />Commission decision to deny this sign. He felt more and more signs are being erected in <br />Pleasanton and he did not feel this was the image the citizens wanted for their city. He thought <br />that the Livermore WaiMart store did not have a McDonald's sign on it. <br /> <br /> There being no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Mr. Tarver, seconded by Ms. Mohr, to introduce Ordinance No. <br />1688, to be read by title only and waiving further reading thereof, approving the <br />application of McDonald's Corporation for a major modification to an approved PUD Plan, <br />as flied under Case PUD-85-08-5D-1M. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver was not in favor of a lot of signs, especially the pylons near the freeways, <br />but he did not feel this sign was out of place and was only a small sign to let people know what <br />is in the WalMart store. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr felt the sign was insignificant. If WalMart were the only store in the area, <br />then having the sign would not be necessary. However, it is part of a shopping center and there <br />may be customers of other shops in the Center that would go to McDonald's. <br /> <br />07/16/96 -13- <br /> <br /> <br />