HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.1 Appeal of PC Denial of PA86-081
,-
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 24, 1986
SUBJECT:
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal of Planning Commission
Action Denying PA 86-081 Howard Johnson Sign
Variance application to exceed maximum permitted
area for directional sign, 6680 Regional Street.
EXHIBITS ATTACHED:
A.
Resolution Denying Variance Application
Background Attachments:
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 86-063
denying PA 86-081 Howard Johnson Sign
Variance
2. Applicant's Appeal Letter, dated
November 6, 1986
3. Proposed Sign
4. November 3, 1986, Planning Commission
Minutes regarding Variance
5. November 3, 1986, Planning Commission
Staff Report regarding Variance
6. September IS, 1986, Planning Commission
Minutes regarding Conditional Use Permit
7. September IS, 1986, Planning Commission
Staff Report regarding Conditional Use
Permit
"''"'''o,:;:''~
1.
Open public hearing and hear Staff
presentation.
Take testimony from Applicant and the
public.
Question Staff, Applicant and the public.
Close public hearing and deliberate.
Adopt Resolution denying application, or
give Staff direction and continue the
item.
2.
3 .
4.
5.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
None.
DESCRIPTION:
Mr. Kym Secrist of Secrist Sign Company, representing Motor Lodge
Associates, is applying for a Variance for a directional sign at Howard
Johnson Hotel, 6680 Regional Street. The Variance application is to allow a
sign that exceeds the maxirnimum permitted area for a directional sign.
The Zoning Ordinance permits Ilsigns displayed for the direction, warning
or safety of the public . . . with 8 square feet maximum per sign
The Zoning Ordinance permits only one freestanding sign per parcel and
"no variance may be granted from the number of freestanding signs allowed."
The Applicant is proposing to modify the existing double-faced free-
standing sign at the front of the property. With modifications, the proposed
sign would have 40 square feet of area (see Attachment 3 - Proposed Sign).
------------------------------------------------------.-.---------.-----------
ITEM NO. 0- /
COPIES TO: Applica~
~~'"
~.\
.__. ".__' ,~--~_ _ "_~,:""'_'~_~_ -.,. ""'-. .....'..-.-T.'
As part of the project signage, the AP. ~cant applied for a Conditional
Use Permit for a 28-foot tall freestanding sign at the rear of the property
facing 1-580. The Planning Commission, on September 15, 1986, approved the
sign with a condition that the existing freestanding sign be removed. The
Planning Commission noted they were opposed to having two freestanding signs
on the same property (see Attachments 6 and 7, Planning Commission Minutes and
Staff Report).
After the Planning Commission action on the Conditional Use Permit, the
Applicant applied for a Variance to allow the existing sign copy facing
Regional Street to remain as a 40 square foot directional sign. On
October 14, 1986, the Zoning Administrator denied the Variance application
with findings that:
1) the application was for a second freestanding sign, not a
directional sign;
2) the proposed sign area was five times larger than the maximum
permitted area for a directional sign; and
3) the mandatory findings of fact could not be made to warrant
granting the Variance.
The Applicant appealed to the Planning Commission. On November 3, 1986,
the Planning Commission denied the Variance application with findings similar
to those of the Zontng Administrator (see Attachment 1 - Planning Commission
Resolution).
Based on the above information, Staff finds that the intent of the
Zoning Ordinance is to allow directional signs that direct, warn, or provide
public safety, such as IIparking", "entrance onlyll, and "exit only". The key
areas of review on a directional sign are 1) intent, 2) size, and 3) sight
distance. A directional sign with text reading "Hotel Parking II and a size
closer to 8 square feet might reasonably be considered through a new Variance
application.
Staff recommends that the City Council uphold the Planning Commission
action and deny the Variance without prejudice to allow consideration of a new
Variance request within the next year.
. -. ~-.-.:.
~_..~ ..~.~--~:.:.-..~_....:.~....
RESOLUTION NO. - 86
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DU3LIN
UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION DENYING PA 86-081
HOWARD JOHNSON SIGN VARIANCE REQUEST TO ALLOW A
40 SQUARE FOOT DIRECTIONAL SIGN AT 6680 REGIONAL STREET
WHEREAS, Secrist Sign Company has filed an application on behalf of
Motor Lodge Associates/Howard Johnson Hotel for a Variance from Section 8-87.50
e) of the City's Zoning Ordinance to allow a 40 square foot directional sign
where a maximum 8 square foot sign is permitted at 6680 Regional Street; and
WHEREAS, on September l5, 1986, the Planning Commission approved a
28 foot tall freestanding sign approximately 9 feet from the rear property li~e
requiring removal of the existing freestanding sign located adjacent to the
Regional Street entrance; and
WHEREAS, the application has been r~viewed in accordance with
provlslons of the California Enviro~~ental Quality Act and has been found to be
categorically exempt; and
WHEREAS, the Zoni~g Administrator held a public hearing on said
application on October l4, 1936: and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all
respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending denial of the
Variance application; and
WHEREAS, afeer heari~g and considering all said reports, recomme~-
dations and testimony, the Zonip-g Administrator denied without prejudice the
Variance request indicating tha~ the four mandatory findings of approval could
not be made; and
w~EREAS, Secrist Sig~ Company, representing the Applicant, Howarc
Johnson Hotel, filed an appeal 0: the Zoning Ad~inistrator action dated
received October 15, 1986; and
WHEREAS, the P1anni~g Co~~ission held a public hearing on said
appeal on November 3, 1986; and
WHEREAS, proper not:ce of said publ:c hearing was given in all
respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS. a Staff Report ,..ras submitted recommending upholding the
Zoning Administrator action denying the Variance application; and
WHEREAS, after heari~g and consider:~g all said reports, recomme~-
dations, and testimony, the Planniu3 Commission denied without prejudice the
Variance request indicating that t~e four reancatory findings or approval cou:d
not be made; and
WHEREAS, on ~ovember 7, 1986, Louis H. Clark, Managing Partner 0:
Howard Johnson Hotel, filed an appeal or the Planning Comission action; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on said appeal on
November 24, 1986: and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all
respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending upholding the
Planning Commission's action denying the Variar.ce application; and
t...... .:",.,,1.:., ~,'""~~..:,:., ~.:rr j\,
. _~u.-=:0~~~
WHEREAS, the City Council heard and considered all said reports,
recommendations, and testimony as herein above set forth;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does
hereby find that:
l. The Applicant's proposed l2 foot tall sign with 40 square feet of sign area
identifying Howard Johnson and Lord Dublin Fine Dining is considered a
freestanding business sign pursuant to Section 8-87.10 c) and h) of the
City's Zoning Ordinance.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE City Council does hereby find
that:
A) Authorization of this Variance will 'constitute a grant of a special
privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the
vicinity in that by definition the Applicant's sign is a freestanding sign
not a directional sign. The sign area of said sign is five times larger
than that permitted for directional signs and nearly twice as large as
that which would be permitted for a single-faced freestanding sign of the
same height and setback. The City's Zoning Ordinance permits only one
freestanding sign per parcel and prohibits the granting of a Variance from
the number of freestanding signs permitted.
B) No special conditions or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property
that do not apply to other properties in the vicinity, so that the stricc
application of this Chapter does not deprive the propercy of rights
enjoyed by other properties. The fact that the Hotel is not located on a
major arterial street does not constitute a special condition or
circumstance. The Ordinance does not even allow a Variance from the
number of freestanding signs as an option.
C) Authorization of this Variance does not meet the intent and purpose sought
to be achieved by regulations in this Chapter in that granting the
Variance would be in direct violation of the Zoning Ordir.ance.
D) This Variance will adversely affect the orderly development and the
preservation of property values in the vicinity, in that one of the
purposes of the Ordinance is to promote orderly development of uniformity
among signs in that there is no basis of fact for granting the Variance
and other parcels are not allowed more than one freestanding sign.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE City Council does hereby uphold t~e
Planning Commission action denying without prejudice PA 86-08l Variance
application and directs the Applicant/Property Owner to remove the existing
freestanding sign and supports as required in Condition #2 of Planning
Commission Resolution No. 86-55. Denial withouc prejudice would allow
consideration of a different Variance application within the next year.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 24th day of NO"lember, 1986.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSEc:lT:
Ha'lor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
-2-
">~'~.c'".,.,:.
.'. ".-' .......'.~' '." -.',.
::~ ~~.'.:.~i;~:Wi.;~ -,!,-: ~~
: -'--"">'~::""~
,-.' ".'.:; ;~-~
..-..':'"....
~.
c';'
. ", " ~
RESOLUTION NO. . 00 -
063
- -"i RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
-----------------------~------------------------------------------------------
UPHOLDING THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ACTION DENYING PA 86-081
HOWARD JOHNSON VARIANCE REQUEST TO ALLOW A
40 SQUARE FOOT DIRECTIONAL SIGN AT 6680 REGIONAL STREET
WHEREAS, Secrist Sign Company has filed an application on behalf of
Howard Johnson Hotel for a Variance from Section 8-87.50 e) of the City's
Zoning Ordinance to allow a 40 square foot directional sign where a maximum 8
square foot sign is permitted at 6680 Regional Street; and
WHEREAS,' on September 15, 1986, the Planning Commission approved a
28 foot tall freestanding sign approximately 9 feet from the rear property line
requiring removal of the existing freestanding sign located adjacent to the
Regional Street entrance; and
WHEREAS, the application has been reviewed in accordance with
prov~s~ons of the California Environmental Quality Act and has been found to be
categorically exempt; and
WHEREAS; the Zoning Administrator held'a public hearing on said
application on October 14, 1986; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all
respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending denial of the
Variance application; and
WHEREAS. after hearing and considering all said reports, recommen-
dations and testimony, the Zoning Administrator denied without prejudice the
Variance request indicating that the four mandatory findings of approval could
not be made; and
WHEREAS, Secrist Sign Company, representing the Applicant, Howard
Johnson Hotel, filed an appeal of the Zoning Administrator action dated
received October 15, 1986; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held public hearings on said
appeal on November 3, 1986; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearings was given in all
respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS,: a Staff Report was submitted recommending upholding the
Zoning Administrator action denying the Variance application; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission heard and considered all said
reports, recommendations, and testimony as hereinabove set forth;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVEQ THAT'THE Dublin Planning Commission
does hereby find that:
1. The Applicant's proposed 12 foot tall sign with 40 square feet of sign acea
identifying Howard Johnson and Lord Dublin Fine Dining is considered a
freestanding business sign pursuant to Section 8-87.10 c) and h) of the
City's Zoning Ordinance.
A TT ACHMENT 1
;::~:\:-t::11~~.~'J~~~".i;:;.:i_~~:.:;~.T:-;:. .
/P.......
..:...... ......_..,:;.l; -
,---..-.:"
"/. . -.
..-"-/
BE IT FUK'rHER RESQLVED THAT THE .-' "nni~~' ~"mmfs'siim:'do'es.hereby
fCl.
that:
".\'S.t" i..t.'.~"<"d."'-t.
,'A)",,,A1,lJ;ho.r4.atiOlL'jlf>;lthi.s ,V_~j.a~e wiJ..1c~j::!,JlS ti tuce' a" graritiojj;.4al;sp';;"i.ji:l"'--':~"'+r,...o"""''- ~.,'
'privilege inconsistent 'with the limitations on other properties in'the
vicinity, in that by definition the Applicant's sign'is a freestanding'~ign
not a,directional sign. The sign area of said sign is five times 'larger
tha~ that permitted for di~ectional signs and nearly twice as.large as .
that which would be permitted for a single-faced freestanding sign of the
same height and setback.. The City's Zoning Ordinance permits only one
freestanding sign per parcel and prohibits the granting of a Variance from
the number of freestanding signs permitted.
B)
No special conditions or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property
that do not ~pply to other properties in the vicinity, so that the strict
application of this Chapter does noJ: depr~ve the property of rights
enjoyed by other properties. The fact that the Hotel is Rot located on a
major arterial street does not constitute a special condition or
circumstance. The Ordinance does not eyen allow a Variance from the
number of freestanding signs as an option.
C) Authorization of this Variance does not meet the intent and purpose sough~
to be achieved by regulations in this Chapter in that granting the
Variance would be in direct violation of the Zoning Ordinance.
D) This Variance will adversely affect the orderly development and the
preservation of property values in the vicinity, in that one of the
purposes of the Ordinance is to promote orderly development of uniformity
among signs in that there is no basis of fact for granting the Variance
and other parcels are not allowed more than one freestanding sign.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Planning Commission does hereby
uphold the Zoning Administrator action denying.without prejudice PA 86-081
Variance application and directs the Applicant/Property Owner to remove the
existing freestanding sign and supports as required in Condition #2 of Planning
Commission Resolution No. 86-55. Denial without prejudice would allow
consideration of a different Variance application whithin the next year.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of November, 1986.
AYES:
Commissioners Barnes, Burnham, Mack, Petty and Raley
NOES:
None
ABSENT :
None
Planning Commission Chairperson '.
ATTEST:
-2-
. ..' -.' . . .-' .
':~':;:"'~~.0'?-~:~~~~]~~~Jf~~~E~-t~~~~~i_~~~~5~~~:}';:-.~
'7~.-.::~::~:':7.,,;;~~~~~~~1'~R~~f.(~f_!:g~~~'-~~fr;55-~~~.d1l.-~~~~~~!:!;~-E~}S ~,:..-
CG>.
~
~
/?J4
V /
<;; I' _ r\<"'. I"
0'0-'-- 6 I
',;' . ..: 1)
NOV 7i986.
DUBLIN PLANNING
City of Dublin
We wish to appeal the November 3rd decision of the Planning Commission
denying a variance for an existing directional sign at the entrance to the
Howard Johnson Hotel and Lord Dublin Restaurant.
The reason for the denial is a fairly clear conflict with the sign ordinance.
However, we feel that a method must be found to save our existing sign
whose main purpose is to direct guests from Dublin Blvd. to our site.
Without admitting that our directional sign is also a free standing sign,
we suggest that the sign ordinance be modified so that two free standing
signs would be allowed under certain special conditions:
1) Site would be a minimum of four acres.
2) Location of the second sign would not be visable from the approach
to the first sign.
3) Neither sign would be detrimental to neighboring properties and the
welfare of the City.
A second suggestion would be to have the City install directional signs for
"LODGING" at the corners of Dublin Blvd. and Regional Street and of Dublin
Blvd. and San Ramon. The City of Pleasanton has done just this on Hopyard
Road for its hotels.
We would like to cooperate with the City in solving this problem. We feel
that removing our existing sign would be detrimental to both our hotel and
to the City.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
~t\~
Louise H. Clark
Managing Partner
~. IT AC~P,lI!'IIl ~;rtv~
'. ;: w. ~ f~..:_l,~. l~;l
J,' .. If' llr~a'i~~i~ I
J
0--
t -:">:
/::"..,:~~',~~<:-',~~~.;~ .
:':~'~::f:':~X"&~~-'
~EcrRIC:AL .
~i~~?iC~i~
li~~'~[';;
~",.a~>..
A.....,.!\ K"!>'!!f "~r."'1""i"\ F""
--f r:.\ J.; ~~.'" -.~ OJ'' . ....: :;. ..' i :,
~~. ~. t~;.\ ~ ~~ ~f:~ ;.:~' .':', ..:": t;'.{ -~
. t ~ ~ 'Q."~,~a~.....l::;'c--;":j ~ -<;,
3-Sh~E--t:l
~-
,
1 ::fl:: \ - f.
I
1
\
F ree..s-to.. 'f"\d. 'f"\~ '5''':, f"\
'5~<"e..e..+ cr'\k-...."''' c:.-e...
( , \
t:o...c...1f\c.J 1?e'1\c(\~\ S-r,;
LtO "S'D- ~.\-. 'Sv(\jk-~tLc
* I-B
f"re.e.. s\o...v"\d..;""'l s\') VI
5' ,- \
Tre.e., tv"\-\"(""o,....,t..e..
(FCU-I(\~ ?c\.('k\~ Lc-t)
40 sO' Q..\-
'S'Il"\~ \e.. -~"'-c.e...l
I
-ji: 3 wed ( r'.\.OlJ r\~ e..J 'Si1 n
G6-r Ele..voJioVl
( "FILC..\ "-'1 7"..A~,,,,\ i..,-\: )
Ie::. c:." c+ u......,^ ~1 'I_I.."
I~' ""jf~i' ~ ~..l1~0r(J~""'i.. 3 -Sh J-
~: ~ ~ 6~~ d ,. ~ -~ ~'~~::;l f ~.. '. . ilL L,t
.. iI 11;';"'.1 ;'~~~Ul~ 'd--.-
-~ I~~~it-~ 14:;~:4
=n ; ~tLj
;,> "- _.,<:1.1 IC:;,~.';_..(.i---_'~IL -j
b7" %~ _ '- ,;~~;~i. j "~;: ]0
I' -- I ..f-",V-----
};:\~y>::tl~iU
'-""." :'_!"'.'" .,: ,.._,..~1,;..".. ,.'f, 'I
.' '~_~,,:. .t:---;..-:~.:.--=:.:.~ . J.J'J' <: '\..~
. '; ~c l ::'-.} .::[t.[;" " ; T0
.1='; "l;,'.'";,I~/"-.f..,-,.r-:. :
...-~3.~1 0-"-:'"
~iiij:~}~~;'~; <Jt; 0
UfiTlff~:fN:'. j
d", 'C' ,..,.... '.- "," , J
..----"'~..~~~>.",; i'...~j
,-- b
~~
.:::-'.<'
.~ -. ,
!
I
1
i
\
\
.}~
\
I
,\
:1
.~'.
'-" ,~<.
- 0"" -':, - ~ . -
.~~--
C
.'
-,
;::--:- ....
.';,1~f~i:.': ;
;
-.
r
1
,
I
1
i
'11
,
~::.<.
fi ~''''71 ;i~"'T, ~~"',\?'0' {
t\ Ii i~~~hN~tt:)J a 3 - S M~~t
3
Ms. O'Halloran said that the Commission had the option of acting on
Conditional Use Permit contingent upon the insertion of a condition
that a Variance request would be acted on at a later date.
In response to an inquiry from Cm. Petty, Ms. O'Halloran advise that the
provisions for a low profile sign provide an option for ide fying the Center
or listing tenants names on the sign. She said in the cent case, the
Applicant wishes to list the name of all of the tenant the sign.
Mr. Vaught said that if it becomes necessary, an if it is impossible for the
Commission to authorize the sign with the squ footage allotment proposed,
he would attempt to accommodate the square otage. He requested, however,
that the Planning Commission consider h' request for the additional footage.
e to be placed on a pole, it would be
permitted to be 30 square fee n size, but even with the larger size, the
proposed sign e reduced as it is proposed at a size of 31.6
square feet.
Cm. Barnes, and by a unanimous vote, a
approving a special easement sign. for
RESOLUTION NO. 86-062
APPROVING PA 86-095 DUBLIN BUSINESS CENTER
SPECIAL EASEMENT SIGN CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
SUBJECT:
Anpeal of Zoning Administrator action
denying PA 86-081 Howard Johnson Sign
Variance, 6680 Re~ional Street.
Cm. Mack opened the public hearing and called for the Staff Report.
Ms. O'Halloran said that at the September 15, 1986, Planning Commission
meeting, the Commission had approved a 28' tall freestanding sign on the rear
portion of the site, and at that meeting the Commission had noted that they
were opposed to locating two freestanding signs on the same property.
Ms. O'Halloran advised that the Applicant is requesting the Commission to
approve the Variance by considering the proposed sign as a directional sign.
She stated that ~he size of the proposed sign is five times greater than the
maximum allowable sign area for a directional sign.
Ms. O'Halloran indicated that Staff recommends t~e Planning Commission adopt a
Resolution upholding the Zoning Administrator action denying PA 86-08l Howard
Johnson Sign Variance.
KjU Secrist, Secrist Sign Company, 36 Annette Court, Walnut Creek, stated that
the proposed sign is one the Applicant and Owner deem as mandatory. He
reviewed several of the reasons why they felt this is the case, including the
fact that the property is off a thoroughfare, has no traffic which passes by
it, and has only a single entrance. He said he thought the purpose of a
freestanding sign is to advertise a business, i~cluding the particular types
of gcods sold on the premises, but not to direct traffic. He indicated that
he ttought a directional sign directs traffic, and asked for clarificaiton of
what constituted a directional sign according to the City's definition.
Regular Meeting
PCM-6-l49
November 3, 1986
.-",",~~..,~~~::,?":~~",!!.~,,.,.,,,,,~---,---,_.,._----,--~--...--.--..-.-
A~l.~ f''' =~ mr. ~lT
s- f;r\ 0,." i1""
~. ~ A\,: ~}.) ~F':,,:"jE ~- ~~-~:~
.. ~! ~>~,,!'!:J il ~,,:q ~
..11m ..3~>;,;.:...,a~~\;j"," .
y
Ms. O'Halloran stated that directional signs are typically found within sites,
or at the entrance of sites, and direct customers in terms of parking. She
said directional signs are not intended to identify a business, but to direct
people to the entrance of the sites. Mr. Secrist said he was confused in that
without identification on a sign it would be ineffective. Ms. O'Halloran said
often directional signs contain information pertaining only to parking or
drive-through windows. She also said that there are some directional signs
which display a business' logo and then'direct parking, but those signs do not
exceed the 8 square foot restriction.
Mr. Secrist indicated his concern that a sign limited to 8 square feet in size
and indicating only parking on it would have a tendency to cause customers to
assume that the parking was for the Willow Tree Restaurant rather than for the
Howard Johnson Hotel. Mr. Secrist said the sign which is visible from the
freeway provides for tremendous advertising, but that if customers do not have
a means of arriving at the Hotel, or get discouraged when looking for it, or
can't locate it, then the purpose which the Planning Commission hoped would be
achieved in approving the previous sign would not be accomplished. He stated
that it is probably true that an 8 foot sign could be created, but that in
comparison to the sign which currently exists for the Willow Tree Restaurant,
the Howard Johnson Sign would not be seen. Mr. Secrist also stated that he
thought if circumstances arose in the City where someone was going to build a
new project with separate frontages, he thought the Commission would review
and consider the request as very viable.
Mr. Johnson Clark, Partner, said, in his oplnlon the directional sign is an
entrance sign, and the only problem remaining is the sign size. He also said
it is the only sign which they have out front. He indicated that they have
two frontages, and that the freestanding sign which was approved by the
Commission cannot be seen from anywhere on Regional Street, and that both
signs could not be seen at the same time. He stated that the sign does not
adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the
vicinity, or would be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to
property or improvements in the area. He said that the sign would be an asset
to the City in that it helps bring guests to the Hotel and brings 8% of the
Hotel's guest revenue back to the City. He requested that the Planning
Commission overcome any semantic hang ups they may have and approve the
Variance request.
Cm. Mack closed the public hearing. Without further discussion, on motion by
em. Petty, seconded by em. Barnes, and by a unanimous vote, a Resolution was
approved upholding the Zoning Administrator action denying PA 86-08l Howard
Johnson Variance request.
RESOLUTION NO. 86-063
UPHOLDING THE ZONING ADMINSTRATOR ACTION DENYING PA 86-08l
HOWARD JOHNSON VARIANCE REQUEST TO ALLOY A
40 SQUARE FOOT DIRECTIONAL SIGN AT 6680 REGIONAL STRE~T
Regular Meeting
PCM- 6 -l50
November 3, 1986
_n.._______...,... ",_ .... ._.-,;.~,_.",....-.-:__,.-.' -:!.....-.c_~---.......-~.-. ~.- .-...._..'c.,..-_______ ..-
. . .
PROPERTY A..'lD
ZONING:"
~, .~ .
,.~.-':'
,-.,':,;:-.
. :., ~ . ..
".,;c.-.
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION:
S~~OUNDING LAND USE
AND ZONING:
.:.,....
ZONING HISTORY:
S-421
for'
1972.
-' The Alameda
93-unit motel and
S-595X and C-3206 - 'In
the Motor Lodge_
S-777X'and C,3787
Motor Lodge.
:In May J
s-600
theAl~meda
-;-...p,-~,,: --
. ~,,'.. '
.:,,>;~:.>;
ITE~.N,?;
. ,Vii:ti:!."",;;,~f1\<Bi~iJ8i;fi"iEii%ii
_ ,'_h,'_.'
PA .81-002.- On March J, 1983, the Dublin City
re ,the subject property from Light lndu
(H'_J .to Retail Business (C~~).
PA ~3-011 - A Design review approV:al was granted on May 16, 1983, to aIlo'w a
550, square foot addition and remodeling to take place at the main lobby area
of the moteL
Counci. "pproved a request. to..
'al (M-l) and Highway Frontage -
PA ~4-026 - On June 18, 1984, the Planning Commission approved a Conditional
Use Permit and Site ~evelopment Re~iew for a 77-unit addition to the existing
mo c:e 1.
PA 86-081 - On September 15, 1986: the Planning Commission approved a
Conditional Use Per~it for a 28 fObt tall freesta?ding sign on the rear
portion of the site.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS:
Section 8-87.10 c) states: ~The term Business Sign shall mean any
structure, housing, sign, device, figure. painting, display, message placard,
or other contrivance, or any pare thereof, which has been designed to adver-
tise, or to provide"data or inforID$tion in the nature of advertising, for any
of the following purposes: -
1) To designate, identify, or indicate the name or business of the owner or
occupant of the premises upo~ which the Business Sign is located.
2) - To advertise ~he business conducted, services available or rendered, or
the goods produced, sold, or.available for sale upon the property where
the Business Sign has been lawfully erected."
, Section 8-87.10 h) states: "The term Freestanding Sign shall mean a
Business Sign suppo~ted by one or more uprights, braces, col~~ns. poles, or
ot~r similar structural components placed on or "into the ground, and not
attached to a building, and having no exposed or .:onnecting wires."
Section 8-87.50 (Permitted Signs) of the City's Zoning Ordinance
ide~tifies 19 types..of signs which.are permitted in "any district and may be
located in required yards, other sign or yard regulations notNithstanding, and
need not be included in any computation of permitted aggregate sign area. ,.
Subsection e) identifies the following as a permitted sign:
ltSigns displayed for the dire;:.tion, warning or safety or the
public, including pedestrian and vehicular traffic, with eight
square feet maximum per sign, except pavement markings which are
not so restri<:.ted as to maximum area.tl
Section 8-87.65 a) (Variance Procedure) states that:
"When practical difficulty, unnecessary hardship, or a result
which is inconsistent with the purpose and intent of this Chapter
occurs from the strict application or this Chapter, the ?la~ning
Director may grant a Variance from the strict application or the
standards pertaining to size,-height, andjqr location or signs
regulated by this Chapter in the manner prescribed by this
section. No yariance may be granted from the number of
Freestanding Signs allowed."
In order to g~ant a sign Varia~ce. all of the folloNing four findings
must be made:
1) the Variance ?uthorized does not constitute a grant of special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations on_ other properties in t~e vicinity;
2) ,
special conditions and extraordinary circumstances apply to the property
and do not apply to other properties in the vicinity, so that the strict
application of this Chapter deprives the property of rights enjoyed by
other properties; P
-2-
'-::?:2Y~~~~:~~~.~'i,:fJ~~l~%j7?~7:~-.~~:'r:-~-:.
3)
!f{1?f}2-
: '1;:- '.;'_4">~- . .'
the Variance' authorized ri.eets the inte. md purpose'.sought.
.achieved by the regula~~o~~'in this Chapter; and. .
to. be'.
("0'
.....-.-J'
."
r
'.
...;
,..1-_ ,.'~ ,.4 )~. ....-\i~"..the~(Y.ari:ance <a.uthorized~\lees~ot; -'adversely- 'affec~.t=t1l~1""o'rtre-rly - ,_;.c.'I~ cr....A~~.....:-..nn.~...;
development of property and the. preservation of property values in the
vicinity. '.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
<:Categorically E1<empt, Class 5
NOTIFICATION: Public Notice of the November 3, 1986, hearing was published
in The Herald, mailed to adjacent property owners, and posted in public
buildings.
ANALYSIS:
At the September 15, 1986, Planning Commission meeting, the Commission
approved (subject to conditions) a 28-foo~ tall freestanding business
identification sign located nine feet from the rear property line. Condition
#2 of the Resolution approving the freestanding sign stated, "Prior to
erection of said sign, the Applicant shall completely remove the existing
freestanding sign (including means of support) located adjacent to the
Regional Street driveway entrance." The Commission further noted that they
were opposed to locating two freestanding signs on the same property.
The existing double-faced freestanding sign is set back approximately
five feet from the front property line, is 12 feet tall with a total sign area
of 80 square feet. The Applicant proposes to remove the sign copy which faces
the parking lot, thereby reducing the sign area to 40 square feet. The
Applicant has requested a Variance to allow this sign to vary from the eight
square foot m~~imum sign area permitted for the directional signs. The
Applicant contends the sign is a directional sign in that it directs traffic
on Regional Street to the business (see Attachment #1 for the Applicant's
Variance justification and appeal letter). On October 14, 1986, the Zoning
Administrator held a public hearing and denied the Applicant's requests
without prejudice in that the four mandatory findings of fact could not be
made. The Applicant subsequently appealed the action to the Plar~ing
Commission.
The Applicant is requesting the Planning Commission approve the Variance
to allow the existing freestanding sign (with reduced sign area), to be
considered a directional sign. The sign, however, is five times greater than
the maximum allowable sign area for a directional sign.
"
Based upon the location (5 foot setback) and the 12 foot height of the
sign, the maximum sign area permitted for a single-faced freestanding sign is
21.5 square feet. The sign area of the Applicantls proposed directional sign
is nearly twice that which would be permitted for a freestanding sing.
The Applicant contends the sign is not a freestanding sign, but is
simply a directional sign which exceeds the maximum allowable sign area of
eight square feet. The mere renaming of this sign as a directional sign does
not make it a directional sign. By definition, the Applicant's proposed sign
is a freestanding business sign in that it identifies the name or the business
and the services rendered on the premises and is a sign supported by at least
one column. The City's Zoning Ordinance expressly prohibits two freestanding
signs on a parcel.
Prior to approving the Applicant's Variance request, the Planning
Commission must make all of the required,findings identified in Section
8-87.65 b) of the City's Zoning Ordinance.
Staff recommends denial of the Applicant's Variance request in that the
granting of this application would constitute the granting of a special
privilege for the following reasons: 1) the proposed sign is characteristic
of a freestanding sign, 2) the sign was originally approved as a freestanding
sign, 3) the Zoning Ordinance allows only Dne freestanding sign per parcel,
and 4) the City Zoning Ordinance does not permit the granting of a Variance
from the number of freestanding signs allowed.
-3-
._,....':..- . .
. .~_.,~.,..: \~-:.:~:~;::.~::.~_~.:-_:_;;}:~~~~1{~:ti~:::~~f~~~;~:q.D1ti:~-i?_)~'l:',~~~ii?l~S";~~~I.::~.f;:,:~~;:~~~Tr~~;~i::~TI;.;~~~~;:~.~:_:- -
RECOMMENDATION:
FOR}. _, 1)
.'-~;\;'''::~:: 12:}.
3)
4)
5)
Open public hearing.
:Hear Staff presentation;', _. .u....... ....:..~;.~_ .:-..~~::) :;"I."...J ~ 1..::_:;<::"-,:'':':._.~
Hear Applicant and public presentations.
Close public hearing.
.Adopt Resolution denying Variance request, or provide
direction and cont~nue to the next meeting.
ACTION:
Staff recommends the Plarining Commission adopt the attached
Resolution upholding the Zoning Administrator action denying
PA 86-081 Howard John Sign Variance.
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A: Resolution of Denial
Background Attachments:
1. Applicant's Statement
3. Zoning Administrator Resolution of Denial - "
4. Zoning Administrator Minutes - October l4; 1986
5. Applicant's Appeal Letter, Dated Received October 15, 1986
-4-
~ '::~i~~;~Jk1M;;~~l~J:'.:' ;~ ~_.
..,. .
'''I;'':
':~kii!
'~::: 1\ ; ~:
. ,. i'~~' \\:r
. ;"Il'
','..'
l' '. . '. -~. ~ . :. ;.
',1
; ,.
" "-.
j
:,,' ,,"
;'
~:. :;~
:.:
i"
l:'~
..
. .. ~:":':" :'_:~:~~::,:-::
· 'i";::'::'~f~~:~-.:;jiM~,~'
't.~:~;~;,:"?{}" .
. '. :;y':i.;\:~':! l:;.~~::
':. "
,4. ..:'
. .. .;:>:-,:.;.~/{:.~~i~_~_;~,';.r~...:_::..
"_"'~':"""" --,--'-
.."':: .'~:. ~:!."
~:. /.
:: ~~~B~
:', ...~~ ~
Om~:;;;:'lJ' ,
. 'j' !;!! ~ ....,. SEP,17 .1986. :
:':f>;' ~ .' ~'~.: <1".: ....j ib:. <;. se~rist $igTi\o :..:.~ : .~'. ". ;.i-l:.: ; ",:'':'', !AN: ':~'N-I'-N' G;
'. r'" .___"..,..".\.-...... .' ". ..J.t.. DUBUNP .,,'
"t.'~r<',-;:-r.;,..:i"' ..j A DiVlSioll ofSecrist!ndustJies, mc:." ;;'(": . ,..... . .. ....;.
. .' ':~f':1 r T ~ :tJr ;i~<.;' :l\" L '~.l'-:!~~.':~+:~~1 :\\;:1 +'.j;"I:: .~ '~:" ~~.~~~;~ :~ = i ,',' L -,
~..: ',: ";.~41!ir. II :It'..~I;I''''': -':. ~l ,.:"'_"~!."" ~ ,>I'.1i : :.,! :. I' ....._l~_..l ",; ,;T::
SECRisT',si~~;c~p~,!:.:;:':1 'I >~'Yi;' (. U:'(-<':~~;:'~:'~""':;:{?' :':\ : 17 Septe.",be~' 1986<;:<
. 36.Annette ;Court.....:.._..t -......1! :' ;....; "l .
.'ainu tdCr'eek'~::Ca :~: :94596 " j! '. '
(415)9.30-7~41..i d' . ...,ill F' ;
. ".'~+~H:H.,::\ji -.
Zoning Ad~dni~~. r:"tor ::~ .:'11 ~ '. ,.
City ofDu)>lin:...:;, ..';.,. ~ I .. i
Dublin, Calif'!r.nia,..: ,',1il" ;.
. ,.;,: ". .. !'.:: :.."l'II.... '
:<<1 ~ :j.' :. .. ..1':.'
. . ". .~. -;~! .;.
Dea'r. Hr.~ T~:~.~:.:).. ;'r- ':~J.W-" .. _. __' j.
'. "r' ,~. , ...., ~, I' . . ..
\:e hereb)' request that a ~~ariance be approved and recommended for a ~ig.n
pres~nt:ly e.rected on :site' !htHo,",ard,Johnson Hotel, :6680 Re'giona1.Street;"
DuhIin,: th~: details a.nd 'sp'~cifications'oCwhich are set forth belc,", herein."
~<.:!n. ~,;~,.~i~n'::~:~~~~~: ~~~~~nc'e 2f Ho~ard' ~:hns~n,.:Ht~el ,: 16~8~ Regi~~~~ '~t~eet,
: . ~ 1,::Ll.:L>:(;~l1~~r,:~a- :;!!'. . '. . .,; .,., .: I, .:; ,-
Si,!:'[I';"r":f}~lis;:'~~C/?O\j !fC,OPY . Ar;ca) ,:with :t~P; of 'sigr: vi'~ frot: grcund leve~..
Si::~;1 Typo::: Do'\ib'le-f:.ace~ .I~terior-il1uminated-'Cabitfet Sig~~~.l:oun':.ed hori;:cnt'aJ.).y.
. .. on C en te're.d p~le \;ith:\ 5 tucca e:-:terior. .Plastic. Faces for C0P:i a:rca.:-'
.~:: 'r.~ ." ...~n .', ~.' ;,. .:. .:1 \""-
Sign Vse: Directional, for:, t~~'o scperate bus'iness occ.uran'ts:... HQ':.l;:rc. ..:chns'cn ;EQc,=l
~nd Lord Dublil.1 Re~ ta'~rant'. Sign sil;nifies' e'n'trance t'o par,;,oce lo't~:.:
adj2.cent.~to bt:ilding's:~ Presently, '.rear of .siErl s.ignifics. Ectel 1030 :with:
tir-rov.9' po'in~ing to ~nt'r2.nce of Eotel. ,.
"
:: ,.....
~J V ED
.',
..:'.1'
.':
;;:
'I'
::ii
:il
'!;
of 11"!;1..~.j.i, C;J.lifr.:-=nia
the'. Cj:ty L.... ....~,
the~uz~ of'diic~ti~~a!
. . . ~ ,
. . . "
. , . 'ili
1.1.1'[';;-:::'~ s<:tid s'ig:1 ae.sc'!:ib{~r: ~!:.n\:';:)5 rresentl:r :[:,0 S~\!,:~.T~: ie~~(: ill "'''1-; :.ar~€.7-3,;
Lc' ''l",,-c''l:1eh,br/i~''-JI\I'':hle-["::cc,: and ..' .. .' .. ,
\,ru;...-e.;lS the ~ pj.;~ni-::g Commiss'ion, C::.. t.y of Dublin, Cali:-for:c.i;l has ~;;;'i-res3~'(i a
. d2~ir;~ thBt :-sc=.id sign .be r~r.:o'led f;:=7i1 i'ts e:dst'in6'-:-1~.catio~J nlld -rcrla.ce~
a -::-,\.lC~l srr~llcr ;5ig:--. ~!1. itsilrlace;.during a Planning. ComrniskiC'n r-...:;.:lic Hearir.z'
c:'. 15 ~ q: t:e~b~;r:., 1986,. ?-n'(I!1 . t .
. >~ .' '.' ., - . .~.; i '.
V-r.LrC;]:i' tj-le .o....-.-:t.;x:; of cC'r:-:1T',er.c~.a1 businesses loc'atec' at 66eO Rehio~Gl S.tre-=t,
Cul:lin C.;.lifC'r~l<:l' ar.~ con~(!rned that re.,'lioval of s'aid- sit,n' d~sc:-iced her'ein'
5h::11 ';ender the l,~e :o{ dttection.Jl siinage at l1rc'rerty entrance i::~ffective,
inl,i':litiOlg :~6~me~c:i.<l1 :t'~41dti. to said bu~inesses,':' ;. :. ! .
. : _ ';:;i:;:;,: < :11': .:: <.". ;.1
,.,,':'.: 't;l!; r,,~'ore : ::tt .is llcr.cb>" i-equest~d that a variG~ce be' recQL:t-e~ce:d end
.' -" :;:!;. ;qL.. / . '_ i
, ., . :'ill.. . - " ,.
:T! .d.. !:.... ."
.', ;.
,;.'
'". :.
pr.npO~.~""'L
--'
.;
~:ill::.r'!~5
fo:'hie,:
.:Jnd
presentl', h-as a si~r. ordina:1ce ......h.ich
sigr.s: in. excess ~f ~2 ~q\lore' feet cf cory :nr~.~,
..i
;'
.'
i
,.
'.'
'..
. ~
:i'-..i.;
!:"" ....,',_~._.,_.-.. ~.'. ''-,._.... . .__. ........,..~ _.u
'.-0.;'- ~~ -;:-....-:- '-:F -:--',.. ,..:;~,:,:?.' ",' -::.-- ....,...-,.
.. ,_.~.'"-_~...--'-.. r..... _ ,-'
. . ""._'"
.._..~ '.. '..- ." . --.' -
.: ':~_.'c-_..:::,~~~:,'.~;:::.;/~:.-::~.;..::~t.::.. ':~~7 [.:;1~.:.~-;".:~ .....
r\~rT l\ ~~11MENl
__....:.:a IIM.~
. ':3';:.:'::i~~Hf~1f:!tt~2~G~;;~I~::..~:,,:,:::- . '", -
.::~::?_:~J~}r~:~r.Er~~:~T~X~~111~i;-~;r.f~?~J~,--~~~r;,~~~?~' ">~'.;:.;~~~i~F;~~;-:~~~-~ --~,.
,. ii'
j.;f
:~': n
.!;
~. .1 .;
.,'
':,'-l'
';'.;:"~~.lJ';.'~~~~~~~!~~,:~_,~~~;;~i~it: .
. .-., ~.'.':._'~_. !;.-.
. .. -'; .' .
~'- :-.
(
.,
l
, : ;:. ~ .
.. . ~! :! . -' -: .,..'. . i
arrr"'c~'~d. for a directional. siJ;n,.IIO squ3re-~eet in copy area; placec'at: the .
entrance. to property: at 6.6~0 Rez:J.~nal:.;Street, Dub.li~; Cali~ornia.. lri:an~effort :::..
to ccmply 'wit~such varia.~Fe from ;City::Ordina~ce, :~~~ch .'p~~sently .all.ow5.. .for :.i :;.H .
a maxin~~.H'1 ?f :.:) square.' fee~11.fer a~Y,...on'~i .d~:.eftJ.onal,;~.],gn~ :.~p~~ic3:~~. a~.r:ees to J ~q;':.',:
rcT.o':€: .~!l'~ s).~n face freD: Ith: ~e~x: :9f:.:the:.~~~s~~ng ~.<:-3bin~~:-.: p~acint: a p~~~nep~ ;: ,
sh~~tn.',l:al c.)ve1" in '!-ts.p'lace, making.the s~gn then single-faced instead of',.', L
dO'.Ible. : ;md r'<~\Jcing. ther';by " the:.tised,.o.ve'r.all ;square': footage': of, the :sign fr;';';;: l~
EO oq""rc fe".:; too,ne:':ha~~1 :~hat- .or:4?,.sqiiare 'feet ~~n copfarea~; Appli.cant ;. "j ::; r:
cff'2.:?:s . the>'fo.llo,,'i?~ ~par~.ic~l~r.s ..~n' ~~'pP?r.t~:o~: ~~~ ~~eques ~ f?r_ varianc2: ;:.. ~ ~: t~
:.._.:~...r._.. .-:.:...:...., ~-;!l.;'-:.;...;!.~.:. :'<.~"'_ ':.:.i;., -..;1:::'. .;:..:' :':.' I~.;!::
1: 'l~':'it'~ ~~is ting: sign o~Finances ",~hect"tY.. of D~bl~n }~~: F~ss~d. a ~~a~~r<;.:l ~~:I:.!
forbidding the US" of .moni'than one. .f,re.estanding sign per' lot ."sed In.the ,t ~: F .
advertising' of,tI-.e busine~4"ctiviti~s:therei.n; .and ~applisa:-.t 'ii' rre~:.;nl)Y [i;': '.: I
mi!nufa~ture. o~' sllc1~. a:fre~~ta~di~g' ~~~:n :to be place~ on ~1;e southe2.:5t" "p,=?rt~on; :. i::
of.the.proprt:I. Th.': City of Dubhn, however, has c1~rly defined in pr.esent .;.:' I":
ordinances that th.,re is ~: dis tinct .difference :bet"..e~en such a .freestanding sign..~
and signs used .fC'r: the purpose of. directing traffic ;to a r;iven location, ...hereby.:
such di.:=c'ctional signs ,are: nl1o~led in~ addition to an)" fre~st.:mdi.ng sign ..used~: ~
Since opfllic::!nts I hus_iness,r-s arc loca~ed in a cul-dc:-sac a,t the dea.d end of !'; ':1:
Rc-:>ional Street, Duh.1.i.:l, .and is n'ot visible in anY......;1Y fro:n Ti'.ain. traffic thorCH.lgh-'
f.,;cs (i~e~ . DlJblin .Elvd.)',:: nor is thc_.~ign in question pr~sentl:' existiri~ ~t': : .!;
tIt:: e;ntrcl1lce th/.~re.toi and ;~aid sf[:i1 _is therefOl:c used solely for the purpcsc-.! .:: 1;:
of. direct:ing 'traffic' alre'iiay, 'or. .R~tionpl. Street hcadinc :i~: th:e dir~ct.:iOli.. o~ t~~-: r
rt",=,perty towaJ:G tr.n. entr;J.!1~~ ':lnd r<:rkinr; ar~2S :of ~aid b'u::'ir.'~_ss~s, i: 'C3.u'Ct!t ~Ei'l"
c.1c :r.l'2U ~ IIfrCl!:..;t:Tlllin~ 5i..~:n't.1 '.1;::d.'rusti be dee:n~tl '~dire.t:ti(~:'21'.' l:l r..,tlJr.c. ar:d' .F
th..~td:eT.~: . is . Ti-.;.t t:hbj e..-:t :':th '.'reg\!lations reTtnfnin~ 1to 'f;c€~";~ndi.~~; ~i ri~.~~e.: ! ;';;:
. ~ . '.' . .. '1 l' . . . . . . - . . i' . .~' ~ ",:' ....: ;
-:rl1~~"""n 'i:.:: present.ly n9 '0rdii~..;1i'1Ce prchibiting .the 'C.se .or U':cris."_h:t:t.C',:,,:e dir~cticnal;.
~i;;n in zn:l_ &J.vc:-: lot; fre:~st.jndi-;'.:; or othen;is~, in th~ ()t:r;o~ D...~l:':::l.. \ .'.!~
. . !j.. ..'.,! .'
7... .DlJri.f!.~ ~he Pl<::utin2 Cr:rtT;rydssion Public Hearinz of 15 'Ser:ter.ber~ 191:6, the
Zmd.'n7 '\,~r.iini!;t1'"<:l.:or: c:.t:,:lof Dublin,':-suggeste.d.thtit:a smaller cir':~t::.on.zl "
!'::L;;n .~it:-: 3" :.et.t<:J:z <Iesth.~ticallY be .placed -in place: of. s:aid sign .in questio~
;"_t th~ entranc:c cf tll;:?: r=c't'rty. Arrlidmt feels this would:be..ir.efiective in'-~
c(,\l::paris('r~. t.o tr..2: C):j.stinr:'j/~.o square-foot sign .for 'directi'cnal use.~. T,!ithin :151=...
c.i~'ectl)' to" tIle c.S,St of the sisn in question, there pr-cser.'t.]y e:-:ists (l sign .
.vpp:::o:d~!I~;Jteiy_ I~' X e'.:~(0irr:1 tall advertising the entr-ance ;to the. "to:i1] m,;;,' F..'=.s't~u~,
rr:.:1'C. If <!?plic;;.~t '....;:1:; to foJlot.; t":1c. suggestion of the Zon~nf:_A6:i::istr:Itor, .
;:ocr! rq.J.:::e. th~ sl~:n ir: r:tJ.~?~;tion (.......hich 'is ~l X 101 :x. 12' :t~ll- siwil:1r 'to the .
1. :":.,1<...1'..;: -:! ~:;.t.:l1~r;Jn t :~j_;:'l:) r./~. Lh the rec.arr.'[;Jended si:l211er.sir.n;-.o;ith 3" -lc.tt.e.rs J SUC::i..
.. ::;:~:l c-:t:ld Ilnt l~~: ~5'~C:l b)~ on-coi;'ling traffic on Regi-on;;l ~tTeet u:'r:il such
:.r....!ffic ':,oere nlr~;::d;: at the ent-:-a~ce o.f the Hetel) rc.ncering Sl.!,:b 2 si~i1 useless
in cir.~cttng -t:1~-;ft{.: t~ tbe e..,tr2::C~ of the Hotel ....'hich is' seperate.- frce thC1t.
C'f thl2 \;!iJ.l~"is !;r~::;t~l':'.::'.?:1t...{.jith0ut such a sir,TI 2S exists ~I X 10' h'b.ien is si..~i12!'
if'.. si7.~ to th"lt cf th-! f:;il~oYJ'5 I s::"l;.:-'. placed .ot the ei.tr~nce. of 2ppJicants I 'busi-.
r.~:~~ses placed ~..-i'.I~rt: j.: :'ITc.scntl::r e:dsts at the denc end of. the cul--ce-s2.c or :
I: f'i':_~ c;!,:'.J} StreE't, ;J~'i':l i.Ci.1nt';r:1.:JY ]cse potential busi.ness C\.ls-::'O['il€:r traffic cc~.fl..1se::.
bY' UI':2 lJck of d.i:~!::.~.:.i_r.:-:1arl!~i1?nage. 2.."'7'tple in directinf. such,' tJ:"affic ,:to the Hetel.
r~r'I-'1.~ l:)Gkinf f~)i tl;:.:! ~nti~~llce. to the Howard J('!lnsC,1n Hotel ;mci Lrn:o Dublin
{\;!".::~..ir.:l11t m\J~:t v=-~:;ei1tly :eravel .1: least half....-~y GC"".....-:, r.e:;::.ional St::?ct in c-:"ce:!"
t(;" see the sj.~;n ill "1Je:stioi~, sig:'.:!.iyin~ the entrarlce to sa~c1 b1,;sir:ess~s. PJz:<::.ir..g~'
a cifnific~ntlY s",allcr sigr.J.I1 its place would require th~ s",,,e l'e.cple lcoking
f':."l]- the e!'ltr<2~,ce to travcli~.nJ.rIlost. the-~ntire'"Io..ay c1G";.;n Regicn<:!l ::tre._e.t- al~Qst.:to ~ .
t~'.~ eJ1t!:";Jric'~).t!>~l[J b~fore: such a sign 'Nould.be visible.: l\pplicant fe21s that' :.'
s<.:.ch -circt.lm~t:Sll'cCS; coristii:~tea c:.:::ect.: and apparent need) in tl,~':interest (I{:~ .
maintaining'~'fair and .reasoriable ongoing business trade, fOF sC:c~:a c.irectionai
si"71. in-'i'ts :'present size;.! ~equiri::g-such a 'va'I'ia~c'e as is requ~sted he.rein.' ~
c '. ~ .. . ,.., !! ' '. < ' , ,
. ,I (2)
d:
.'
.!!;
.;!;
.,
I'
t,:'!i!
'i,;:!\!
or.!;.-
L;'-.I
'. .!:
. <~~: .:~, .
:.
!.
~ -':._:::-:-""'::;:-0..".:.:.... '.' . .__.._ _ ._ ,.,.__ ...,~-.~_.~: .::..::..:~~::..:.;.: ...~.::~.,..:,-:';:;.::.;.;:;;.;:-.:.. ~.:.{...~~."::;-."":"'~...........,..;::"",":O-:_..,........~~..-;:-I..':.:..--... '1'".~
-.-_..~""._-..:.-.,.-.,.... .
, :.;'::Y:L:L~"~.~:'~~~~~;~:;~X~~~~g:~t23~:ftf~~:~:'
. '~sil21~~~~:1~::::p .
~_:~ -, -.,'".-:;t'
......;,
.'
"
'. ".:" ~ !
'-." .;. -:...:~.., ;: . . !
. .;.:?:;':;K.,~;( :.):;:~~W;fJ~-\jil., . .: . ". . ::. .-::i. ! ".: :';:.. ':j
J. . s\...clr:~~ :~~!'ia~~c~::~s ~:ls 1~~q.'J'!s t~'~ herein supports :thc aim? :i~d :cbj ec.t:}";:cs r ~
0::: 'thl~ 'C1.i:YJ':.dtbD\~blinl! i'.i"n~tl\!.c'::s' ~ot inhibi t "!=Jr :5e~ '~rh;eccde{n..:i:~f~.r:'~vi~i2 ticrl. . I'
of: . Ci t..~.' ~.ig~~ ~d-~dj.nnn~~~'~"J~lt : fcrth: ~;~e 'to. the . ri~tura ~and :cj~t-,~'.r6sta;~is ;Qf~ the i
. ;;h~~~'e ~e:tlJ~~'~~:j:~P€~1:;~?~~~.~~~I'~2 cf Title 8 of. The iCi~j .ofiul:!~f1-'~Or:di~a_~_:~'~'~ccdc,!.'
.. "rI:~cJ.":7 :.c;;:Sign 'Reeulations, Sec. "E-117.1 DELLARATIOI> .OF.,FHU'OSFAND 'STATEIE:;r..
or. OE.JECT~Y:f'S,;~'!t ."f~t~~~~.:~!1'-.... The objec~ives of ~~i.s .-Ch.~r;te'<:ar'e to~ ~': ~~ :!
c) Prot!iote:,.re.asor..ll~le ;;\.mif:onn!ty an:ong slgns and .~hereby ..c.~cocrage develoft:':ent ~
. ;ud use or:iiliris .'Wftich.'arelj compatible with 'adjacent land ;Jses"ana \.-hi~h :protect
l"'li:;ines:;. 5ii:e!. .~fro~:--.los:s :=-c!t r-rominence resulting from ~.us~ ~of 'exc'essi~e sipls.1 .
('ll 'surro\lnd.iiiri "':=:1 ~cs; ":: .ar ~ttract a-pd direct persc_ns to v~rio~s acti:Vities an~.
en-::erf'rj_:;cs.~.3nd t<;J- prc.n'o~~!mcre effective visual cOtrnlunication for the nature:
. cf 7.c~d~ "rId Her"ices ';'2.vai:lable, in order to provide for' the maxiltu!:', public .
. con~eniehce':,,:;.~".. . 'Applic3:h~ts 1 existing sign .in question,' :c:l1cp..:cd -to rcrr.;lin i.,:
'r:i~~sc~t :-;i.~~ ~n:d 'hedgh'l, -'dlces net cnuse any adjacent busin:ess 'site.to lose'
rrn::d!"~~n.:c .'as its kiz~' .is~'~irrilar "to' that of nei~hboring s~fmcr.e" ~~d ~$ it '
i~.. ;-",J t:"::;~"::r ;in "us~ .nr.d :1:-:15'. peen .for sorr.e time and has ~ho\.lr.: no ill-effc.c:t.s on
:: ul--:h n~i~hboi:in~ 'b~IS:i.~l.eSSC~, and s.:dd:- sign is clearly ~comp'.;;tible vi th the
.;!(:-i0.c~n:: iimd ~uses _e~ "it ~'direct.s traffic to the ent.rance to the Eotel and
R€;~'t3urant Parkin{;~'fo:!.cil~iJ.es- the ~ajority of ~hich s'aid 13nc is uSf'~d for.
On the other hand,:hOt...ever:~ dcni~J. ,?L the variance request'cd herein .'~ould the;
f;;>,j.l to att.rc::.ct and 'd.trectl~rcr.sOn$ 't~. this specifi.c actiYi-t.y and enterprise
::rl: furth~r>"\o;ith ~r.c ...1mpl:d~en ta~io'n ~of significantly .sr..aIler 'signar,~, would
C'::'t~:;t.it1Jt~<'lc~\ .:!f[ec..~ive:.~~isual cc;;-dunicaticns foi reasons ,f'.ive:n 2oove.
......... '::! .
.' -. ~: ;!'
It is not our' .iiltent"ian, b:r -,,~::q c: this re'luest, to justif\' i.n on:, ~""3.~-, 2r:y
vicl2.l:icn of :Dublin. CitJ- ?~cn:lge O:-di..,ances for the pt..:rpC'ses of e:lhcncing eu:-
abiJi:::iefi to kdvertise_1-!heie. others aTe not so allc-..:ed, nor is it Ot;':: intentlC'n
s':oL 2n e:tc~ptj'dil'.:lT~pr({cedertce vith respect to allcl,.;able sirn;1.f.!e v2ri2Qces .' ,
b-=ccil.:Li~i'; :'freqh"ent..for '0 th:et: future bus~nesses' requests. 1':e _are conce:rne'ci for~
th~' slJ:.-;ivd.~'.-~~~l.'gr~~_t~ .?:f!l?ur business cct~vities.whi_ch. ere fCiced ""ith. =-._' j
"cor::neting.in :',if:very'_'cometitive environment, and feel that the. CiTc~s~an-ces
'r.l)t~d heI'~'i~"~'~~ran:t:".t~e *equest ~e-n?~"'" T:.a.ke as they are unique to our present
blJsiness geogr'aphic' an'd eC~l1omic situation. lle feel th2.t the Citrts intenticns
.a~c very much' similnr:to .o~rs J and r.ope you -will cdsic!er this Teq,'.Je~t .3, valid
cn~ .....~lich vil:1 benefi~. ~h.~:;City ct. Dt..:blin a:1d its business ,cC\iiir.lunit:y..
'.:'. . '. ';i1
Ie i~ our wish' to achie.ve':ri decision yith respect to our r~q\:est-for 'mrJ....ncc
on tbis sign as'soen a's is;:possible_, 25 tHe Clre presently requirec to r'2:;'o~:~ it
;, .., .11
r:-c1r. the pr~p~r.t:7 prio.r t<?l1the erection of our large freestanding si[,;"'. p..-hi.-:h
i~; being manuf~~tured ~t'this ti~e. SRould our request be 2rrrcvecl. ~e ~ould
here to'" avoid ;havi~-s t? r~~ove the sit;n only to re-instc.ll: it 12.:e~. ~;ny::hi~x
~~~ C~I\ do t~-~~ecd~F '~he.~~rocess in this matter, ~e sh~ll:do. P~ease cc~:act
u!] to l~t us kno-..J \-lhat. you!irequire. Thank you for your prc;;;,pt 2tte:-~t:0i1_
':Ii
..,1
.-7:: :';1 L
Sir:ce1'~~Y,. '.'
'""" ,,~~,~t;:i~+-f~ -. i
::rb::,a~~'2:i:~SI,(reSidtT~I\" i
E()\-' ,\ RD J Offi;~;~~;lilO.~:;:,~,...,.... ,'.....'.l!......,......~..;;....:....i.lll......... I.
..:...,..............;,_.,...'!.. ll- .".
. . ~ ", .",. r"'~'..I. - .. . . . '" . .!:. " ..
_ . ...._.__ . ~ ~ ". __,,.-,..,_ _ J'. ,...~_(-:=':':-::':..-;- :W:" __.._ _._., ___::-_ ,... . __'__'__ ._-:.:...:..... ;;;;.: :...;~.~;;,:";..:;.:"-:......:.;.:.._.::,.. . . ~
1,;'
:1
::..\!
:~!!
r: :'~:
:'..~-~ :
~ . ~; ~
.;i;
'.;
......
....::-. .
"'''i'.'
...77:::::.:,'.~-T~F!i~~:'\:[~:~~:;I(:~~~~~I?fE.~. -.
/
,
/
./
""";J
A RESOLUTION OF
:E DUBLIN ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
/
--
--------
DENYING PA 86--Q8l HOWARD JOHNSON VARIANCE REQUEST
TO ALLOW A ;40 SQUARE FOOT J?.~qrrONAL SIG:l
WHEREAS, Secrist Sign Company has filed a~ application on behalf of Ho~ard
,hnson Hotel for'a Variance from Section 8-87.50 e) of the City's Zoning Ordinance to
.lo~ a 40 square foot directional, sign where a maximum 8 square foot sign is permitted
: 6680 Regional Street; and' . , : :.
WHEREAS, on September 15, 1986, the Planning Commission'aparoved a 28 foot tall
~eestanding sign approximately 9 feet from the reaF property lin~; ~nd
WHEREAS, the application' has been revie~ed in accordance ~ith the provisions of
he California Environmental Quality Act and has,been found to b~_ca~e3orically exempt;
ild
,
\ ~
WHEREAS, the Zoning Administrator held a 'public hearing~on said application on
Jctober 14, 1986; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given. in all respects as
'equired by la~; and .. -
i'
,.
w~~S, a Staff Report was submi~ted recommending denial of the Variance
,pplication; and -:'
,.
;,
WHEREAS, the Zoning
recommendations and testimony
Administrator hear,d 'and considerea' 11 d
'a sai re~ortSt
as ~ereinabove set forth;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Dublin Zoning Apministrator does hereby
find that: ..
1) Authorization of this Variance ~ill constitute a grant of a special privilege
inconsistent ~ith the limitations on other properties in the vicinity in that in effect
the Aaalicant's sign is a freestanding sign not a directional sign. Tne sign area of
said ~ign is five times larger than that permitted for dir~ctional signs a~d t~ice as
large as that ~hich would be permitted for a singl~-faced rrees~anding sign of the saQe
height and setback. The City's Zoning Ordinanc~:permits only one freestanding sign per
parcel and prohibits the granting or, a Variance 'rrom the nU2her of freestanding signs
permitted.
2) No special conditions or extraordinary .circumstances apply ~o the property that do
not apply to other properties in the vicinity" so that the s~rict application of this
Chaater does not deprive the property or right~ enjoyed by other aroDerties. The ract
that the Hotel is not located on a major arteria~ street does not' co~stitute a soecial
condition or circumstance. The Ordinance does not even allo. a Variance """" th~ number
of freestanding signs as an option. .7
3) Authorization of this Variance does not meet the intent and ourDose so~~ht to be
achieved by regulations in this Chapter in.,':,that granting the Vari~nc~ _ould be in direct
violation or the Zoning Ordinance.
4) This Variance will adversely arfect the orderly develop~ent' and the rreservation of
property values in the vicinity, in that one of the purposes of the Ordin~~oe~s to
pro~ote reasonable uniformity among signs. Approvin6 'this Variance reauest in violaticn
or the Ordinance would not;promote orderly dev~lopment or u~ifor2itJ a;o~g signs in that
there is no basis or fact ror granting the Variance and other parcels are "at allo_ed
more than one freestanding sign_!
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Zoning Administrator does he,eb:- ceny PA 86-021
Variance aaplication and directs the Applicant/Property Owne, to resove t~e existino
rreestandi~g sign and supports as required in Condition #2 of Planning Cc~"ission 0
Resolution No. 86-55. The denial is without prejudice to allow conside,a~ion'of a
dirferent Variance application within the next year.
PASSED,' APP~OVED AND ADOPTED
this 14th day of October!, 1986.
jgJA~c~r~
Zoning Adminisnat;6r '"
~~~Jlfh1^.()'4 ~ b~
Associate Planner
~TT ~ ~iJiJ~M"""I.' .::;'/
"'~,' g;L ,~., ~ 't',,, " ~ .. ';;1 .
:; a il ll~~ ij~h~h
,l /3'{ ~ fc. /vt1:"&.
-7 _:~~.::~:A.!_~_~::=~1Z'~~:"'tT0:~~':;'~~~;~~:':~.~; I. ~ ..
Regular Meeting - October 14, 1986
A regular meeting of the Dublin Zoning Administrator was held on October l4,
1986, in the Conference Room at 6500 Dublin Boulevard. The meeting was called
to order at 10,00 a.m. by Laurence Tong, Zoning Administrator.
* * * *
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Laurence L. Tong, Zoning Administrator, Maureen O'Halloran,
Associate Planner, Kym Secrist, Representative, and Johnson Clark, Property
Owner.
'" ,'~ * *
PUBLIC HEARINC
SUBJECT:
PA 86-081 Howard Johnson Sign Variance,
6680 Regional Street.
Mr. Tong. Zoning Administrator, opened the public hea~ing and called for the
Staff Report.
Ms. Q'Halloran advised that the Applicant was reques~ing approval for a
Variance to allow a 40 square foot directional sign. She i~dicated that on
September 15, 1986, the Planning Co~mission approved a 28 foot tall free-
standing sign in. the rear portion of the site, subjec:. to the condition that
prior to the erection of the sign the Applicant would completely re~ove the
existing 80 square foot freestanding sign located adjacent to Regional Street.
The Applicant was proposing to reduce the sign to 40 square feet. She advised
that the findings of fact could not be made warranti~g granting this Variance
request for the following reasons:
17
Granting the ,Variance would constitute a special privile~e in that the
City Zoning Ordinance speclfically prohibits more than o;e freestanding
sign per parcel. Given the size and characteristics of t~e proposed sign,
it is considered a freestanding sign.
2) No special c~rcumstance exists ~hich warrants gra~:ing t~e Varia~ce. The
fact that the property is not located on Dublin Eculevarc does ~ot
constitute a special circu~stance.
3) The Ordinance does not even permit the granting 0: a Variance from the
n~mber of freestanding signs.
Regular Heeting
ZPu'1- 6-1
October l4, 1936
"
r
~
F=
_.~-""
6"~
t-"!,d .
G'"S'~~
~1'-:"-'.~.'J;Il::>
~~~.iI:i.
l::";.~~
~p~ ~.">-:t; ~
~:~.~~ ~
.,.-.,,,,~,,,, ~
~:'~J;a;,~ c;):)
.0: ___
~;:.;~... rl'
y~'-
~~~=
. ~.'. ~," ," :~;;:::f::~~::~;!~.:~ :::;:J:Z~;:g~~o,/I;~~. .
Staff recommended that the Zoning Administrator deny the Variance application.
Kyrn Se~ristJ 36 Annette Court, Walnut Creek, representing Howard Johnson,
inquired about the difference between directional and freestanding signs. He
indicated freestanding signs advertise the ~usiness whereas directional signs
pull people into the actual site.
Mr. Tong indicated that freestanding signs are intended for business
identification rather than general advertising.
Mr. Secrist stated he felt freestanding signs in the City were directional by
nature. He stated the sign is not visible until halfway down Regional Street,
and it~ purpose is to direct people to the correct driveway.
Johnson Clark, Partner - Howard Johnson Hotel, asked if the proposed sign
would qualify as a directional sign if it were 8 square feet.
Hr. Tong indicated it would not qualify. The overall intent is to provide
direction to parking. The intent of the sign, the size (8 square feet is the
maximum permitted) and site distance are the three primary issues to review.
The sign proposed identifies the business rather than the parking.
Mr. Clark asked how the City would view a 100 AC resort hotel with separate
. frontages with regard to signage. He asked if the site would be allOl.ed tt<o
signs if you can't see one from the ocher.
Mr Tong indicated in a situation such as that, the Staff would look at which
one would provide effective signage. Given the magnitude, a Planned
Development zoning would be recommended. Under conventional zoning ~he City
is bound by the existing zoning which does not allow t~o freestanding signs.
Shopping centers are the only situation which allow more than one freestanding
sign per parcel.
Mr. Secrist stated the Hotel needs the sign in the proposed location and they
intended to persist.
Hr. Tong closed the public hearing.
Hr. Tong advised he could not grant the Variance in t~at the findi~g related
to sign regulations CQuld not be mace.
Hr. Tong further advised that the application is de::ied without prejt:.dice
allowing consideration of a new Variance request within the year.
Regular ;-leeting
ZAH-6-2
October l4, 1986
-;::-'.~-~-:'.~:1~~:;'~:'- .:
ADJOlJRJ.'IMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:40 a.m.
011~o;J/dLrz~
Associate Planner
Regular Meeting
ZAJ-!- 6 - 3
October l4, 1986
:- i.... I
"".' ~~~i;~';';1~~~~~~~,,~~~ff~~w~1~~~~~~~~~:&lflli~;1ti:~~;~':Ftf';:f:'::-;~:.:.,
u. .,.:_.
- ':,~'- ,....:. ~-;
r' ;:.?:
. ,,;,,:'~"~;.:-'
TO:
~~Hf:~::~'{~;~:&m~~~y:~ :;
36 ,'Annette . Court :<.'.
Walnut~Creek;:Ca: .94596',
. (4:~M.~~~~7:7~\::'::: ': ~>1~" ~.
Me~bers ,of'the'Planning' Commission
The'Cityof.Dublin
Dublin;. Ca.,;;,. '
~.~~, ~~. ,2
. ~'."'~~" -.
FROM:
.., .~.:
.'.
::~;:~~o.~~-~ '
~..".,."
1986
c
'.:.:#0.-.'
:. ~.""
,?f
..? '.~':(~:~,'':' '...:'.f::.,~: .~t -: .:
Dear P1a~ftF,t,i:~t~:~:i~n...~em~~r:. ." " ,.', ::U.= '-~}"}':::" : ,~
We hereb}<~~qu~st- that' apubl~c hearing be' gninte-d on behalf 'of the Howard.: .
Johnson Hotel ;-'; 6680 Regional' Street. ,Dublin, ',Ca. ~ regarding' ,the recent denial
of a request:f9r.-variance on?n existing sign'loqated on the'premises of the
hotel. The"following is a description of. the sigIiage and what is desired by
applican~J?r,yollr;;'J:eview. _':.. ',' ..'~
1) Sig~;~~"/~~'e:~~iy' exists a~d is in use at. the ':front entrance of Howard
Johnson Ho~el!~668~ ,Regional ~treet, Dublin, California. _
2) Sign\i~"pre;ently Double-face, Interi~r..,..illuminated.' 4' X 10' (Copy
Area), with,top of sign 12 ':I: hom ground level. Present total squire footage
of copy area,'is SoJ..' .. . .'-
3) Sig,{'is' presently. being' used for the purpos.e of directing on-coffing
traffic on Regional Street toward the entrance and parking facilities of the
Howard Johnson Hotel and Lord:Dublin Restaurant.
4) An appli~ation for variance was submi~ted to the City of Dublin, Zoning
Administrator 'by applicant on.17 September,~1986, whereby it was requested that
the above-mentioned sign be allowed to remain.in spite of .a demand. made that it
be removed as a condition granted by the Dublin City Planning Co~ission 'on a
conditional use permit application of a separate~ign for Howard Johnson Eotel
on IS September, 1986 Public Hearing.
S) A Public Hearing was herd by the Dublfn City Zoning Administrator on 14
October, 1986 for the purpose ~f reviwing public sentiment and staff recocmen-
dations in the matter. The result of this hearing was a denial of, application
for variance by the Zoning Administrator, 'based upon criteria as noted in a
Resolution of 'same ,date. -
~
,
With respect to the decision of denial by tne Zoning Administrator in the above--,
referenced application for variance, we hereby forQally request an appeal to the
Dublin City,Planning Commission, that the decision be overturned 2nd the variance
be granted ,based upon the following particulars offered herein.
f-
1:
- '
_ _'. '~"--::~-::::~'7,:"~:~?::~,,:,~:..:~::~~:,:~-:...,,.- _:-.,~'::::':'.,".:-:'~.~:--:-'''-'''-'- -:-'~":-: ..::.;~. ~ .-- .' ~":~-::.~~'--:-~.-:.~.. . .-. '..,:r.'_-:_
:;.":~~T:"'" - ~ "".-
;'.;-
..-......
"<:.:
. ,;..:....,.~~-.~';..\;.:;,~:
. .,;........;...-:..--:..:.
..
" .:-';; ;-:><'.,,' . - -. f\ "fr"7 ~ ~R~~ ~ij""f'~~"""1 5
..~),>:});;~,;':-'_,., ..'~ .,..:,.--- .... -'.' t~ ~ a ~~ ta~1it;w;:h~ ~~.
" /;:....'.:u-,:,',;:"::;; . ~:'..,:.:, ,', :,_ ';'.:; .,..,;,'>', .. ':. : Iii '<if. r ~ ~ = i,l_
~" .':,;:~';~},:'.?;.;?'i~;.iY-C"'::"" , . . . ~~t~i:~~;~4~i:~~~~~~7~~;' t'c ~0.~C:r_: ;~
~''-:~~~~I~:,~:.~.;:..,~"'~r,,,~:.f,:,._~'t,.:~.i.~.f,1r~,:.)~:~ ..-,
.' ..:<;~};,~,,~>/~;y }::E:s1~:~;~~~"~;'g~~~~gt:~~::~.E~k~>:'~.:::q~;~<~-!';~-~.}.:~;f~~:~.;,:::<:}~.~::~.~'t..~i\':':;;:/< -' , '
~,.' ,~ .,.:;:)-
.' ...-,---'....::-.-
-~~::..:.::;.~::~.:-'.. ~~~:{~:. -:.'
._........:.'"".,,~:-..Jo .
..~,~..I
....-...;...
....@.."...
....- ,. -....~ -' .
-......~ .,..<."
. ~ ! -. .
(How~~.d).;h!1S0n!Api>eai ;'~~g /))>:
~:~,-.:;..~~~;Jit~~}t~~~)}~.k.-~:f; \\<:_:~<~A/,.~~-_ ','~'
1. SIGN -TYPE'DISTINCTION ':tt., ',-::
Deter';i~~~i",;;ri.t';;:t:'~h~ 'type.-,'~::'~at~gory of sign ';nderwhich -this sign' in 'question
might fall~is~strictly-interpreted with th~ heYp of the Dublin. CitT'Ordinances.
So far, yitbin"'~he.. staff report prior to .t:l;.e Public' Hearing by the Zoning
Administrator~~thestaff has.failed to clearly 'identify which type of sign they'
'in fact'feel;the"~ign in 'que~tion' rep~esen~. In one'section, the'staff report
acknowledges this:applicatio~'for'var1ance~n a'directional sign in nature, by
quoting thea'pplicable regulatio,! of "Sect:l:Oh 8;-a7.50 (Permitted Signs)...
Subsection :.e) Signs displayed for'the direction., warning or safety of the public,
including' pedestrian and 'vehicular traffic ~. .'.". The staff .then goes on to
quote Section 8-87.65 a) (Va!iance Procedu:ce),. .. .No Variance .may- be granted
from the number ~of Freestanding Signs allo-;red, '~ Tnroughout the reoort, the staff
refers to the sign' in questi"on approximately fo~ur or five more tbes as a "Free-
standing Sign", and not "Di>:ectional" as applicant claims. The staff further
states that:-" "'... Applicant f s: sign even exceeds _the sign area pe=itted for a'
single-face~~freestanding S1$n..:", indicating:the review of this-variance app-
lication .ha~:peen'judged ~y~he staff unde~ th~ criteria that it js exclusively .
. a freestanding '.sign. The apl!lica,tion for'variance by applicant is for the purpose.
of alloWiilg::f.or;a larger and tal,ler "direc~iona?-" 'sign only, not .for an additional
"freestanding .sign'" to be aJ;lowed on the property."The application must be
reviewed 'ar{d juSlged \Ipon th~' mer:its of what is 'being applied for,~ which has not
been done~~s:far' . .
During th~'Publ~c:Hearing, tbe Zoning Administrator statej that he felt that the
sign in question'~ould be considered for approval by the staff iE it were proposed
smaller in 8ize. The applicant asked then, if the Administrator &ee~ed the sion .
directional.in 'pature; as applicant pointed out the use to which the sign in"~ -
question is presently under J. which is in th.:.e directing of. .traffic 2lready on
Regional Street, Dublin, 'and heading toward Howard Johnson Ro~el, to t.he Entrance
and Parking Facilities of the Hotel and Restaurant therein.- The Ad=inistrator
again stated'that the sign coulQ be permitted if presented sualle~ and w~th the
word(s) "PARKING" or "ENTRANCE" as the dominant type on the face 'of t.he copy are:'!.
In no place throughout the City Ordinances of Dpblin, has app~icant been able to
find such a requirement that directional si?nage have requireuents as to copy height
or dominance'With relation to other copy on the face.'Ye~, by. ack~o.ledging L~at -
the sign would be acceptabl~ as _3 direction:a1 sign if it ~""ere_ s<:aller, indicates
that the sign is, in fact, a directional sign and not freest~ndi~g 2$ viewed by
the Zoning Administrator. It app~ared to applicant that the questicn was not one
of th~ sign~being' not allowed based upon i~ being a freestanding ~ign, but in
fact, the sign ~~t.being allowed due to it~.size 2S a di;ectional sign. If this
is the reason application is in fact denied-by the Administrator, it is insufficient
as the application itself is only requesting that the sign size E~d height for a
directional sign be varied over what is required. rnis .quldtons:itute c denial
or application ,for variance' based on the fact th2t it is. an application to vary
from existing ordinance on airectional signage. -
The Zoning:Administrator dia,.however, clearly st2tes that uIn o:-de~ for the
Zoning Administrator to gra!)t. a' sign Variance, all of the" follo'.-i:-.g four findings_
must be made: .
1)
The Variance autho'rized does not constitute a grcnt ~'of s::ecial nr:1"Q"ij:~~~'=:-.:-::':
irrconsistent with ~he limitations on other properties i~-the vi~inity;- :
spec~at conditions-' and-. extraordinary CirCUlJstances appl)' to the properr.y'
2)
1:
~
. -~',.: .
'."',~::";";..;..
'.".', .-
-.
'.
,.
.-. ,., ":':::<:~;>,:: -".;::'::~--~~~~;;~'!~;:~:{<~~'.
")~';::I~~~:~:~~~i~~~i~~~~&%L"">T;
'.J%11g~~:-:'J~;~~~!~~~~I~ff~<~,.' ,'. ~,~:r~ '_~
(~
- ~.-- - -.
':'.:/:~~<?-<: :
> .
'".-.;-.
".....,.,..
(Howard Johnson Appeal,
,r : --'-~.' ",-..,: '.
~'g'/;:-~)\}~!,;;--,",
. roo_.
'_~'_ ~_:-.~'.:'\~.'. .~.::~:;::.:'.::~~~>~:;:~~i\;~~-;-:.~. _._ ...
and do not apply.to'the other'properties in th~,vicinity, so that
the strict application of this Chapter deprives the property of
rights enjoyed :~yother propert~es; , , ,;
'3) the Variance authorized meets'the intent and purpose sought to be
achieved by th~ regulations in this ,Chapter; and,
4) the Variance authorized ,does not'ad~~rsely aff~ct the orderly
development of property and the' preservation of.property values
in the vicinity. '
II. VARIANCE QUALIFICATIONS
In an effort to show evidence of compliance with the above require~ents, we
hereby address each item as follows with ~oted evidence therein.
Item 1) This Variance, if authorized, doe~ not constitute a grant of special
privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the. vicinity,
due to the location of the Hotel. Since ~fie'Hotel and Restaurant are located
adjacent to the 1-580 Fr~eway, its flow of customers come directly from the
freeway's traffic. A freestanding identification sign'was applied for and .
granted for the Hotel and Restaurant which is to ~e installed upon the resolutio~
of this application for yariance. As the' buildings themselves are not readily
seen from the freeway, this freestanding sign is absolutely necessary for the
economic survival of the'businesses involved. The adjacent business, t~ Willow
Tree Restaurant, does no, have the proble~ of tall foliage masking the building
site, and therefore utilizes building-mounted signage which is readily visible
from the freeway, thereby excusing the ne~d for a freest2nding sign such as that
granted the Hotel and Restaurant. If authorized, the Var~ance would all~w no
more exposure to customer traffic than that already granted the Willow Tree.
They ha~e very good freeway exposure, and-also have a directional sign'similar
in size to applicant's at the entrance to the respective'property on Regional
Street. With the large freestanding sign recently approved, applicant will have
good freeway exposure. If this Variance is not authorized, applicant will not
have adequate exposure to the entrance and parking facili~ies as is p~esently
afforded the neighboring Willow Tree. As both entrances are at the e~d-of
Reoional Street, on a cul-de-sac, the circumstances warrant authorization for
la~ger signage directing traffic to respective entrances;" as such signage is
not visible from any local thoroughfare. Customers wishing to find t:-;e "entrance
of the Hotel and Restaurant may glance down Regional Street and not ~ee its
entrance, nor a sign directing them thereto, and may w~sh to procee~ to another
business more easily found instead. This is further comp6unded by the fact that
the buildings themselves are not visible at all from the majority 0: R~gional
Street, making the sign in question, the only means by which the ent~ance to
Howard Johnson Hotel and Lord Dublin Restaurant'may be identified at any re~son-
able distance. Loss of this sign in its present size would force pOLential
customers looking for th~ entrance to the Hotel or Restau~ant to 2SS~~~ they..
were travelling in the correct direction until the end of the cul-de-sac in order
to arrive there. With the size and heigh~of the neighboring Willo~ lree sign
at their entrance, these customers may g~ance and see no substantially'similar
sign for Howard Johnson,:and assume they are travelling in the ~ direction
and thus turn away. In its present size, ~he sign in question cannot be seen
until one is half-way doWn Regional Street, almost to the entrance itself.
Reducing the sign even f~rther in size and height renders it almost useless as
~
-'''~;':''~'''''-i'-;'7~,,:,__,,:,~;,,"",.'''~'':~',:;-:;.-;-,''7':-'7T::-~.~.~~;:-~~--:
"'.--...--- .....-.......- ... .-._......_~._.., ..~.....
. .. > .., ~""
.......:-..
.... . . .,-:..';'::.-:~~.:::"';...
.' ....,::;1~!ii;;fijx~ilii~~~~%;!'jitirill~;'i,,2:;;;
.~~:if.~~~;~~~~:~]~:;:::~_~~Zit\:''i;J5:,~1g~~1f~':'/:'' . - . - -
........-....---..-'---
.' .
-.::.:.,,'.__...:; "~ .'_ .: I ".: "':'''7''t'~';';PS:oO-~
::"~:<~1~~;t~lft\~jii(:: _
(Howard
a directional sign. In 'addition:,. it niaY7be ','notedj.hat"few other businesses in.
or around the vicinity or'within the liIDits~oiit.heCity of ,Dublin are'lo~ted
on such a' cul-de-sac, and 'also':,rely exclusi vely.;~.on':retail .trad~ to stay' afloat. -.
Due to its location at the end of Regiona~:Street;'its aspects;of being hidden
by foliage and setback from.:traffic'visibi~ity,'and'neighboring signage exposure
upon two seperate frontages;' Ho~ard'Johns~n:Hotel~and Lord Dublin Restaurant are
clearly not requesting special 'Privilege'b,e :.gr,anted by authorization of Variance
nor asking for.allowances wher~ other businesses arepresen~ly'limited. All that
is being applied for' is what is.adequate .in:cthe:ongoing business activities
already in progress for this property. ':., ',;\~.::'~?,-:: _
Item 2) As stated above, special conditio~~"~rought'about by location of ~he
buildings, the' foliage surrounding the buildings which hide them and any ~ignage
attached thereto from any substantial visibility 'by traffic flows in the area
the entrance being' located at the' end of a cul-de-sac and sign'already sh~win~.
it functions well as a directional sign, all in~icate that:thiS item is not vio-
lated. Opposingly, however, 'should the strjctapplication of this Chapter:be
applied, requiring the sign be ~essened in size;and height~substantially, it would
depri ve applicant of rights :enjoyed 'bT' otller:"properties: Evidence again of this..
is the neighboring Willow Tree.Restaurant ,which:presently has very good exposure.
to freeway traffic and has a large direct~onal sign at their entrance only l5'~
from applicant's. ....
.-
..
Item 3) Per'Chapter of Title 8;of the Citj of Dublin Ordinance'Code,'Article.7 -
Sign Regulations, Section 8-87;1 (The "Chapter". referred to in this item) DECLAR-
ATION OF PURPOSE AND STATEMENT OF OBJECTI'lES; "it states "... The objectives of
this Chapter are,to:.~. c) Pro~ote reasonable uniformity among'signs and.thereby
encourage development and use of signs which are compatible with adjacent 'land
uses and which protect business sites from.loss~of prowinence resulting f~om use
of excessive signs on surrounding sites; d) At~ract and. direc~ persons to various
activities and enterprises.and to pro~ote more effecLive visual communication for
the nature of goods and services available, in erderto provide for the maxim~
public convenience..." Applicant I s existing 'sign'in 'luestion, a11m'ed to' remain
in present size and height, does not cause any adjacent business site to lose
prominence, as its size is similar to that .of neighboring signage, it. is a~re2dy in
use and has been for some time show~ng no ill-effects on neighboring business, a~d
is clearly compatible with the' adjacent land uses whereby it only directs :traffic
to businesses therein. This indicates adherance to these stated objectives' as a~e
partially noted above. Opposingly, denia~.of application for variance as requested
herein, would be a violation of these objectives, as it would fail to attract a~d
direct persons to this specific activity and enterprise, and further, with, the
imulementation of significantly smalle~ signage, would constitute less-effective
vi~ual communication for reasons provided above. ~
.'
Item 4) Denial of this Variance'will cause a notable loss in custocer traffic to
the Howard Johnson Hotel which is al~eady suffering from a"loss in traffic due to
an inadeqacy of signage and. building expo?~re. '.Loss in tra-fiic means loss in
revenue for both the Hotel and Restaurant'therein. Loss in revenue to the Hotel
means loss in room.tax revenues paid the City of Dublin ana 2 drastic reduction
in property value. By allowing the sign in question to re;ain, the City will.be
promoting growth for applicant's business' activities which will enhance the City's
developmental goals and purposes. ~
Based upon the evidences and inforQation provi~ed herein) Bod the addressi~g_ of
r
1:
:
. ':" ~._:-.~."""",-;",,,,,,-,-,h:."'._~,:":"_,,=,:",_:,,._,::'.-:- -:_: -:_7__'~.'~ .:..-. "
..~--..,..------.
..- --._-'-:~~~~"""~~"_"..~:-7"~"-.- - '"
.' ... . .
. '. ..
. ....-.~M
..-. J..' . '.. ..;. . ~.. . -
'. .,;:.........:......._,..,._~_::,,'...:.,..'.'.'..'...~....~'.~.....~.,.~.....~.:.....,,:,'~~..'..;.~.;.::.:.,...,:~..~~.:.'....,. _.~~,_..t...,_~:'..,C-.....~.._,.......:.~,:..~..~......'..,'.:,'..;.:.....,;....:...',.:..;...,....'.:.:..::..:.c...'....:,~.,'.-..,..',,~...._.~.;_,..~:....-.......~.'....:...:~.'..c..:~.lc...~.\.:..:':.:'.;,..;,..,:.'.....".....'....;...~....~....:.;L'.:..:.:...,'..'~,>_~.-.~:'.-.~......:.,.':.: .."..' .,;~'~...'..';:.-.;.~::.-..,~.-.;..:;~_..,'_t.,_:.~.-.~.'-...._.~,_..~.:.:._~:....~.'.~..~,c.-'.-~.,::,,~.~...~!5~ - .:.~: ,,: >~~~';:'C :,': c' :: . '...' .:::.'
. ~-.::, c-.. ~:;,,~~rti~%'f!!#i~~(
-----.-----
.~~~i:\IK:~j&-::~~::::~~~~~~;
,- ..; 'r-:- t.~~,~.~',_: ;.;~:.:" . -'" .' ";;'..:~~:~":~~:"
". ; - . .-.::-."' . .__.-.....
'..-..,
;. -. -'. -_.:.:..~; . . - ,. .--
. -. .' ...-..... .;-:-'
(Howard j~hnso~ .Appeal."S:~i.,;::,5) .': :~. . <~::;'i.:-;<{\
" .v __:~ ',' . ,'::"-~-':." .w" -, -..-". -' ,.;.~'-.:,; :"~-:;'..:-",." -~:
each 'issue'th'e Zoning Adniinistrator and'Dublin City PlanniniCommis~ionh~s':;':,
expressed' ~oncern over; '>:h~re .is virtually no legitima te ~eason' Variance'shouid
not be granted . with regard to .this sign. Moreover, it benefits every party:';.
concerned and due to its.:.:mique situation, avoids", precedence. being set by
its approvaL .
We formally request you approve our appeal herein and gra~t Variance as applied
for. Thank you for your'. ,:,ooperation and support.
:..
:
'-
L'
~
:. Sincerely,
~""
. ,'-1'resl.den t
SECRIST SIGN COMPANY
~
on behalf of
MOTOR LODGE ASSQCIATION
Howard Johnson'Hotel
Lord Dublift Restaurant
t-
,.
~
";'~'-'~:7~.~'~.":..' .':}~'~~I~~~~~2L~~F~-";~0~~;)?t::",::~,-,
': :'. ,-. - _..~.- .:': .
. '. ~:~ '..:(~/{~'::S:'-~~::~':~ :::..~:-.:
. ..-.-------------...-
. . . .
:', ,...
-.\':;:.~s+(~.
.'.:, .. ....
;- .:.; .'-'.-:,:,::-
,*~~~:~:~IY'.N
~....'..'
l:,{J
C;
,.,
Mr. Fraser requested that the Variance be ruled on,
Applicant would make whatever changes are necessary
Code. He advised that if that is not possible with
location, the shed would be torn down.
and that if possible, the
to comply with the Fire
the shed in its current
Cm. Raley said he thought an attempt had been made by the Applicant to conform
to City requirements, and that in this instance, the Variance should be
permitted. He suggested that direction be given to the Staff to draft up a
Resolution authorizing the Variance and establishing conditions of approval,
and that Exhibit A of the Staff Report be revised to indicate that findings
had been made to warrant approval of the Variance request.
A three-to-one consensus of the Cc~~ission was to direct Staff to draft a
Resolution to approve the Variance and to indicate that a lack of direction on
the part of the City, as well as a lack of understanding on the part of the
Applicant, were reasons for approving the Variance. Cm. Nack indicated that
she disagreed with the consensus. (Cm. BarRes was absent.) Tnis item will be
placed on the agenda for the Planning Commission meeting of October 6, 1986,
for final action.
SUBJECT:
PA 86-081 Howard Johnson - Sign.
Conditional Use Permit, 6680 Regional
Street.
~~...--"'"
Cm. Nack opened the public hearing and called Jor the Staff Report.
Ns.O'Halloran advised that a Conditional Use Permit for the proposed sign,
which is consistent with the City's new Sign Ordinance and previously approved
sign program for the City, is necessary because only one freestanding sign is
permitted per parcel (one currently exists on the subject property), and the
Ordinance specifically prohibits that a Variance for an additional sign be
authorized for this purpose. Ms. O'Halloran indicated that the ADDlicant is
requesting the sign be considered a directional sign. Ns. O'Hall~~an referred
to the size of the proposed sign and advised that the Applicant will have to
submit a Variance for authorization of the size of the proposed sign. She
said that the Applicant will need to obtain a lot line adjustment,-as the
existing hotel and sign are on an adjacent lot. She made a slide
presentation, showing the existing sign, and advised that Staff reco~~ended
the approval of the Conditional Use Permit subject to compliance with the
Conditions of Approval.
Kym Secrist, Applicant/Representative, 36 Annette Court, walnut Cree~, stated
his agreement with Staff's recoffiQendation. He said the proposed sig~ will
basically be a duplication of the face or the sign currently existi~g, but
that the upper half would be devoted to Howard Johnson's and the lCI'er half
would be dedicated to Lord Dublin's Restaurant. He advised that a Variance
applicati~n would be submitted regarding the size of the sign, but ~ar.ted the
Commission to act on the Conditional Use Permit at the current ti~e.
Johnson Clark, Owner, said the sign is badly needed, and that one of the
problems which has arisen during the past 14 years has been the grol'th of
vegetation, which has virtually caused the Hotel to disappear f~oo sight fro~
1-580.
Charlie Ryan, a member of the audience, recommended that the Co~~ission
authorize the Conditonal Use Permit.
Regular Meeting
PCM-6-125
September 15, 1986
._---~-----~-~_..---_.-_. .-_.~._-.--
All ~C~!lll ~;;"'!\~"'J"
. 101 ",;j~l:;"7:1_M~
- I" l!."';~\;.:"'JI t':. ~
. . .~ ,", .~...1.1 .I.." '1
fI~;1i:i;:,.~"~~"iA ~
6
(~
1.......',...
0<
V:.~>-.
-.2'.
On motion by Cm. Raley, seconded by Cm. Petty, and by a unanimous vote
(Cm. Barnes absent), the public hearing was closed.
Mr. Clark asked for clarification regarding the lot line adjusment, and
Ms. O'Halloran said that it is not shown on the County's Assesor Parcel Map
and that she will investigate this further._
On motion by Cm. Petty, seconded by Cm. Raley, and by a unanimous vote
(Cm. Barnes absent), a Resolution was adopted approving the Conditional Use
Permit request for a 28-foot high freestanding sign for the Howard Johnson
Hotel.
RESOLlITION NO. 86-055
APPROVING PA 86-081 HOWARD JOHNSON CONDITIONAL USE P~~~ REQUEST
FOR A 28-FOOT HIGH FREESTANDING SIGN LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 9 FEET
FROM THE REAR PROPERTYLINE AT 6680 REGIONAL STREET
Following the motion, Cm. Raley requested that it be noted for the record that
the Commission is opposed to two freestanding signs being located on the same
property.
Mr. Tong advised that Staff has given the Applicant specific direction
concerning functions of directional signs as opposed to freestanding signs.
In response to an inquiry from Cm. Raley, Mr. Secrist indicated that although
the sign in the front of the building will have to be removed, he thought the
proposed larger sign would be of greater value.
~:. -~. ~,:. .;~
BUSINESS OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS ~
esponse to an inquiry from C. . Petty, Mr. Tong advised thJ>~e E:1gineer-
epartment has been in contac with Nr. Hinshall regardYng his concerns
'11 be providing him with a wr'tte~ response durin /he current week.
i-Ir. Tong in . cated that the City Council f d he-ard the ~!oret request for a San
Ramon Road Sp cific Plan Amendment, a~d/thit the action taken by the Council
specified that nly the rloret porti~.~f the'\Specific Plan woul~.be modified.
He advised that he a~rectlon ~lV~/~cS ~o p;~u;t up ~o 100% OfIlce Uses on
the Horet propene , W1 th a maXl:;:um CE? or 50" \ Reta1l Uses.
rlr. Tong s'tated tha LAFCO ~uthorized the annexation of approxir;:ately
2,700 acres to the e ~~he City. ~
Mr. Tong informed the mmission that a Zoning Ordin~nce update would be
presented to the PI ni~ Commission '...-ithin the next S1:'X to nine months, and
requested that i the Co issioners were interested in aving a specific
portion of the rdinance r viewed to let him know. He id that the consult-
ing firm of ncan & Jones ould be wOrKlng with City sta\< in this regards.
Cm. Raley a1d he would like to see conslderation of a low r threshold to
trigger Site Development Re . e'" per:1lt.
Regular Meeting CM-6-126 ptenber 15, 1986
LOCA}~*~~~~j,:~;t:~"". .' " ........ 6680
ASSESSORrPAifC:EL" NUMBE~:
:<_~,~:_(.~,!',';.~,~}r(:.\.:.:" ,:." /:>', .,'.':. ..
. ~ r. _ .-~ ~_'~' i~ti~~~i{ :~.-
PARCEC'.SIZE.: ~:'_~ "<0',' ~:;f:{._>,.-._-
:~~~~~:c' om:'~~~~;': "~"~;'~~';"'~'/' "",,/Ii~ia
AND LAND USE: C-1 Ro"all Bu<'ness D'strlct ;"'~,~, .-c','" --..- ,.t..~ ",-' .
-.
..'-'-;
LAND USE
ZONING HISTORY: S-~21 - The Ala",e:a County Planning Directcit;;":'::ro~e-d ,,,-Site'r:" ':
~~~:~)pment Plan for "- 93-unit mote~ and restaur"-nt:{(H()wa:rd'iJ()hn~;nHota~ >''':';':>-''':
. ...
S-595X and'C~3206 -
the Mc:t,?:~',:L.':i~ga- . .
'~::- ~r,'i-':.;.:>;;.;>.
S-777X ";";;(j'C':'3787
Motor Lo~ge:::.
.~ ::;jt~-Q.";?~: ~'"
In April, 1977,
:.;;.-'J
'. "'.~
~-; '" '.
'- ...: ~"
....;
,._~' - -'
. ';.<: I
. ;_.~~\~{~t
~~i~l
i1\., "W'j1} 71, f1 n f~.'j ~A 1:"'11" r~n T
.'- &\8.., ...~.- 5\
~ l11~J ~ili~i..j-
~
::~;\~
,. -~ : .".:-:
;"__.'h';_""";"
-.-ffi'":'~::t'".[~~r.;.r~!:i.7:l:fE:.
1--:::~"2~~~~~~~~E-~:~.l:~.~~..:-: .--.~:...".;;-f:.> -,.....
S-600 _ A Site Developm, Plan for the Willow Tree Rest. lnt was approved by
the neda County Plannlng Director on June 7- 1977.
PA 83-002 - On March 28, 1983, the Dublin City Council approved a request to
rezone the subject property from Light Industrial (M-1) and Highway Frontage
(H-1) to Retail Business (C-1).
PA 83-011 - A design review approval was granted on May 16, 1983, to allow a
550 square foot addition and remodeling to take place at the main lobby area
of the motel.
PA 84-026 - On June 18, 1984, the Planning Commission approved a Conditional
Use Permit and Site Development Review for a 77-unit addition to the existing
motel.
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS:
Section 8-87.34 (c) of the City's Zoning Ordinance provides an exception
to the 20-foot maximum sign height requirement whereby parcels four acres or
greater may utilize a sign up to 35 feet subject to approval of a Conditional
Use Permi t.
Section 8-94.0 states that conditional uses must be analyzed to deter-
mine: 1) whether or not the use is required by the public need; 2) whether or
not the use will be properly related to other land uses, transportation and
service facilities in the vicinity; 3) whether or not the use w~ll materially
affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity;
and 4) whether or not the use will be ,contrary to the specific intent clauses
or peformance standards established for the district in which it is located.
Section 8-94.4 states the approval of a Conditional Use Permit may be
valid only for a specified term, and may be made contingent upon the accep-
tance and observance of specified conditions, includin~ but not limited to the
following matters:
a) substantial conformity to approved plans and drawings;
b) limitations on time of day for the conduct of specified activities;
c) time period within which the approval shall be exercised and the proposed
use brought into existence, failing which, the approval shall lapse and be
void;
d) guarantees as to compliance with the terms of the approval, including the
posting of bond;
e) compliance with requirements of other departments of the City/County
Government.
ENVIRONClliNTAL REVIEW:
Categorically exempt, Class 11 (a).
NOTIFICATION:
published
in public
Public Notice of the September 15, 1986,
in The Herald, mailed to adjacent property
buildings
hecring "..as
O~TIers, and posted
~
ANALYSIS:
The Applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit to con-
struct a 28-foot high freestanding sign approximately 9 feet from the rear
property line at 6680 Regional Street. The Applicant proposes the sign as a
business identification sign for the Howard Johnson Hotel and Lord Dublin
Restaurant. The total sign area for the proposed freestanding sign is 144
square feet (72 square foot sign, single-side).
-2-
'. ....-.~~;~;f?K?2(~~:-:-~-:....-":~-~
"':':;'~:::::.-::.1{;'>".'" -.
." ,.-.-r ~.'. .:..
,e site currently has one existing free' "ding sign (80 square feet
tota" _Lgn area) located adjacent to the site' :iveway entrance off Regional
Street, and seven wall mounted signs (totaling approximately 218 square feet
of sign area) located on various building elevations throughout the site (see
Sign Inventory - Attachment #2).
The Existing and proposed sign area is consistent with the City's new
Sign Ordinance and previously approved sign program ror the site. However,
the proposal is inconsistent with the City's Zoning in that only one free-
standing sign is permitted per parcel. Additionally, the Ordinance
specifically states, "No Variance may be granted for the number or
freestanding signs allowed." The Applicant is requesting that the existing
freestanding sign be considered a directional sign, and is seeking a Variance
from the maximum sign area permitted for directional signs. The maximum
permitted sign area for a directional sign'is eight square feet.
A Variance cannot be granted for a l2-foot tall, 80 square foot (40
square foot single-faced) sign as proposed by the Applicant,: in that'Starr
considers this a freestanding sign, not a directional sign. A Variance rrom
the maximum sign area regulations ror a directional sign of this magnitude
would amount to granting a Variance from the number of allowable freestanding
signs on this site, which is expressly prohibited in the City's Zoning
Ordinance. A Variance request ror a rour-foot tall, 12 square foot to 16
square root single-faced directional sign would be a more acceptable candidate
for granting a Variance request.
The Applicant's Variance request to utilize the existing freestanding
sign as a directional sign inadvertantly was not included on the public notice
for consideration at the September IS, 1986, Planning Commission meeting, and
thus cannot be acted upon.
Conditions or Approval have been included on the Draft Resolution
approving the 28-foot high freestanding sign proposed ror the rear of the
property, requiring removal of the entire existing rreestanding sign
(including its means of support) prior to erection of the proposed sign.
Additionally, if the Applicant chooses to utilize a parking directional sign
at the driveway entrance, plans must be submitted to the Planning Department
for review and approval. Any Variance request rrom the allowable maximum sign
area for a directional sign is subject to review and approval of the Zoning
Administrator.
RECO~ll1ENDATION :
FO!<'\[AT:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Open public hearing.
Hear Stafr presentation.
Hear Applicant and public prese~tations.
Close public hearing.
Adopt Draft Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit.
ACTION:
Adopt Draft Resolution approving PA 86-081 Conditional Use Permit
Howard Johnson Freestanding Sign
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A - Plans
'-
Exhibit B - Draft Resolution
Background Attachments
1. Applicant's Letter dated received July 28, 1986
2. Existing Sign Inventory, Plan and Photos
3. Location Map
-3-
."7,-.'
~:-"-- ,"'-
,..~:~ .... ::::............. _:.'....-~.~ .
<'~.'-....- .
.:._.4'~'-:~_
"
"
Ii
"
S
\:I
'Z
"
tJ
~..J
~&
I
"-
1~
!<
I~
I~
'"
1; I
~
:> I
R I
J I
[ i
I
Q i
..
../' I
i
I
i
I
I
!
:~ i
i ::~ i
DP.~
.
o ;
iL,
~ '
"
~
~
~3
..;
I;~
I II .'
1'1
I .
. . J
: i : a
\-2~
3<"
<:L~~
! 'i! I_
I ill"
I I
! I
, I
II
;
Ii
i
'i
Ii
I
,
i
I
!
.1 :
;.. i
~
[,
" i 0
~ II ."
g ~ "t
~ l [ ~.
J l~ . I ~;.:
0 I ~~
~ " ~ ...
., . . <
~~ <; I C J
"?<
a~ ; . .
I \4:
89 I :1:J:
~~ :!ii
:i
I ~
)A
) ~
/~~
.a <:l
~ c.o ;z
:::.. co Z
S!2 z
co '<
.~ ~ .....
c..
. . -J ~
'-
~
.. -" '"
~
0
i
1
I
I
I
I
f
J
!
-i
,.f~
. ?~
.o~ '
- . ~ ~ 3~
b ~:! t. "'C"2~
~'-1~~ "')oS.:!
"2:~~ r- ...",..,~
o\=~~r:-_r:~=;:
c.a.:~O(l1S~;z;;
S~~~~~~:i:~
i:~i~~~~~i
:lo ...:) ...'....0..... ~1ot.~
... "', ", "Z "II.:
::!~~...~.,'l~"'Q~
5~~~ ,< .~~'-
Q.~SLi~~~ ~~
~....~~~~~~'?5'll..
~ ~ \'i~ Cl.,,::.: ~ f.:"
....~ ~ -.); ~ ~ T ~ ~
~~\a~~~l'\.~j
~t<~a~ "~~':i
a?~'i~c;i]~Q
6",~\i::~~~~-=~
~.~~~~_~,JOl=~
~~~~i~~~~:l
'X o~..:. .......30::t ~
~~~::~~":~~~
~~~~g~~3~~
01-:: 3 ~ ; ~~ Q;;
Z-::..,.. -~-~"Io-
~~~~~g"".,~~
-:) ~:,Sl~ ~~; ~~~
~~~:3~~~~~
"~~~1-:. ~?:~
... ':I" ~ >:.l ~ 0 f is ~:
~'l)~~::~)l., :-<..
~-::'~:~~~~ ~~
H~L~"
--2.......L'L .. I '
I :;
~
3
~
;:
.
o
~
~
2
f.!)
-
Ul
EXHIBIT A ok~oS'~"
H vJo-...d:!
[lfJr8~-o SIc. H""G .
'5 6
:-;i,:_~~~~~~'f-;~ -.
(
"Z
'0
! .~
~~
~~
::>}.1
\-'
"I-'
::>"2
~g
MN
~
_.,~
~~~
~; ~:~
> I ~~~
~ ~ ~.~!
Q! ~'::> 0
_ , ~~:t
:0; _oil W
~ .Mn->
r~l-~ t- '-U
...~~
~ _",""n j ~
,a! T
, h~ "(-,bJ
. I . ,
,
.< .
,,~,:.~,~'''" I , .'
I Si~!">~-3!d !!e~ :~ J I :;i I .
.~....i:,,"!E.'fL~: I:~~'" 'i"'I;~;I:';~
_..<1l:"';"5~" I ,2%~ !...... :;" ..<
..J" >':1.... ,_,l;.... ,.., 1(." ~:I
.~~:.:.,:~ .......) . .~~..." I~" ~?: c ~..
\!:r~'!~~~;'~';;' .~~t c~!:~ I .'
:: . .... ~.. ~ "," ~ . . .. ~! :i "'; ....j I '2::
-:Z;~~o~:l~E';~ . .~~~ i >~,.. ' ~2
iJ".'.'~1~,L ; .'<. .... F~ 1 .~
"Z~~~~~~'~~~ . po: E G:: ~~
:::.a....2...~~7:.:<'4C .-:.~J: =~ :::) ~I-
aX1l.1~,J,)(:Cl-~ .::..0. \.r.l_1- 1J:1:" ~",
<t~8~~9;~;<~ \-if::;~ t:l:.=J~ :z:l'i \5"~~
'ul~~9'. ~:r~ .'~ \lla~ -i:. ."
cl"---. '-, -. "'.~~ ;Zoo 2.' :z~o
,\-01)'"1 ~.. ~.. '2'";14 -...~ ... -.....
"\~a'2"'21...7.% _Q\-1; Xi":;: ~ ~.. !:)....~
tS:.;. _2.,0.." ~ .;nQ,~~ \-="1> r-'l3~;
eH*g;~f~~~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ;<~~
II' 11,.,.,;"n1-~":'''~ :c..' <. '-'.0
1i!,II.IIII'iil" .' ,,:=--~.~ ~gg 0;;.0>
. I. I II . il I II ~:; ~ i 1",'1 : l I
. 1.1111;
. :; ~
. :! .'
e .2
e ,0 .;
~ Z.
e $ !1" Ji: ~
" ~$ ~
~ ::l~
~ 8'"
~ ::>",
n ~~
I
'!,
.,
"
=:=-----=
r--l
i I
i
C?
II ' j ,
I 91', . .i ~
CS gg 1';:
\.: 5)\! ;...>-,1 I~ ~.~
I @V, l~' "
i; SJ! i dQV=' '" ! ~~
;rC:SI'lol 0
': :2S: \ Z I t!.~
1 QJ" II ~ ~ i ~~
! =j) I~_I---.j---
~ I I ~o I '--"
t9: I r-=2
@S. I~~
srsi. 8%
~:' @:::
<Ql k ;pt).
2SU 'I
L
o
i=
~
'"
j.
III
"-
o
l-
I
,
,
_9----2
-~
"
;"
.:'::;:-:-';:...::i;"(::r"<-
"':'1~,'%;:r.:i:V::I~;~;7ii::;;j;f&;'F.~~Qj;:.",,:
"
\2
,:
~.dl::l-
.,
"
~
.1
[ !u~~r~~i~
. ~~~~o:
.!;!..'::l... ",).
<;"Q!:l.OO(.~
I,J) .. <'It a ~...
~5~~~~~
>..,) 2~~~~':t
\6~::;;...~g
-2 ~ ~ ~ ~~ p..
~~~~~;~.
~~2::':;~'
8.~~~~~;3
'I;.i):-~l..":
1 LI :'j.. il
: ...: 6
"2~;~'"
""" ~;;~~
~:!....~ ::!
~L()C'-::
i2~:2
(S ') s -<....
t!!~~~
o t!.> ~....,
_ ::;0';;,.
Q'" -.>
~ ~~~?.
..\= L"': a....
X, ","...;:Q
F}~~:~,
"
.;
""Z
o
~
").
\ll
-'
III
III
C>
if;
~
\
p
g
. .;~. ....'. .
.1
"
~
.g
~,
=:: ;
oi
p'
D
"'-
~
.Q
~
~
~
3
"
.,
j
c..o
=
~
=
~
:.J
=>
--,
z
Z
z
$
"-
,
:;r
::i
'"
::l
Cl
U
[U!
"
RESOLUTION NO.8,
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
------------------------------------------
'APPROVING PA 86-081 HOWARD JOHNSON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST
FOR A 28-FOOf HIGH FREESTANDING SIGN LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 9 FEET
FROM THE REAR PROPERTYLINE AT 6680 REGIONAL STREET
WHEREAS, Johnson Clark, representing Howard Johnson Motor Lodge,
filed an application for a Conditional Use Permit to locate a 28-foot high
freestanding business identification sign, located approximately 9 feet from
the rear propertyline; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on said
application on September 15, 1986; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all
respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the request is categorically exe~pt in accordance with the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending the application
be conditionally approved; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission heard and considered all said
reports, recommendations and testimony hereinabove set forth;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission
does hereby find:
a. The use is required by the public need in that it provides visible
business identification to the general public for the Howard Johnson
Hotel and Lord Dublin Restaurant.
b. The use would be properly related to other land uses and transportation
and service facilities in the vicinity.
c. The use, if permitted under all circumstances and conditions of this
particular case, will not materially affect adversely the health or
safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity, or be materially
detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to property or improve-
ments in the area, as all applicable regulations will be met.
d. The use will not be contrary to the specific intent clause or performance
standards established for the district in which it is to be located, in
that conditions have been applied to insure conformance with the Zoning
Regulations.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does
hereby approve said application as shown on Exhibit "A" on file ~ith the Dublin
Planning Department and subject to the follo~ing conditions:
~
1. The freestanding sign shall have a maximum height of 28 feet and a total
maximum sign area of 144 square feet (72 square feet single-faced), and
shall be for the purpose of business identification.
2. Prior to erection of said sign, the Applicant shall completely re~ove the
existing freestanding sign (including means of support) located adjacent
to the Regional Street driveway entrance.
3. Prior to erection of the sign, the Applicant shall process a lot line
adjustment with the City Engineer.
-1-
~VIUDiT D
~^nUJ~ a ~
. "11\%-08\ ~..::rtl~<;l>,,<;'''.i''
. ";:ti~f~~fl{"'[j!A1&~.;;];2:;'5~j}Y~~7;'
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this
:h day of September. 1986.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Planning Commission Chairperson
ATIEST:
Planning Director
~
-2-
. -:'-~:~~7~~~~~!:i11r~~t~>~>-~.-.
..~ "'::._,' - '~_..:.:::..~..~'..:.~-. :"_ ;.~'.:..'~.-~ .~'- - _,::" ;';'.;:,,:'.:~-,~-..:;; ;.....<..c. :...::':. _:':~':."
. - ---- .-' , .
,...-.....--.----.-
( c.::
/i' ".
~
Hotel & Spa
RECEIVE
,JUL' 28 1986
o eoro REGICNAC STREET
I.,,:UBlIN. CALIFORNIA 94568
(415)828-;;5:)
July 25, 1986
Dublin Planning Commission
DUBLIN PtAN~ING
Dear Commissioners,
The Eoward Johnson Hotel is in critical need of a highway
sign just at a time when the City of Dublin has put into
effect a restrictive sign ordinance.
The existing 4 X 10 foot freestanding sign that indicates
the entrance to the Howard Johnson Hotel and Lord Dublin
Restaurant is ten feet above the ground. It it is not
visible from the highway and should be considered as a
directional sign although its size requires a variance.
Our proposed highway sign
conditional use permit.
property line and 69 feet
is28 feet high and needs a
It is 9 feet back from our
from Interstate 580 right-or-way.
Although economic considerations generally should not be
taken into consideration by a planning commission, it is
important for you to realize that revenue to the City from
hotel ouest room taxes has been cut by more than half since
the ne~ hotels opened across the freeway in Pleasanton.
We feel that a highway sign will attract sufficient hotel
guests to keep us in business and generate 8% to the City
for each guest room dollar.
The owners of property within 300 of our proposed sisn are
to the East:
*941 1500 047 02 BEDFORD PETER B & KIRSTEN N
26000 P 0 Eox 1267, Lafayette, CA 94549 and
to the North:
# 941 1500 030 00 CHIN PHILLIP L & Ml'.RINi'. L
26000 P P Eox 227, Livermore, CA 94550
Thank you for your consideration of our request.
Very truly yours,
Johnson Clark
Managing Partner
~
A IT ACHMENT 1
1'Pr &.-08 { (fo<4.Ja.}:..d ]" o"t..-.;on S"1G-iV
- q {Ie:; (e,f:> pc. '-"To.
'ni ,-', .' .., "~';"'~','<';~~.,;~..."'" ..' .'--.-
. . ~ ~ .:~~\~~~1~~E':: :_.., :.<:<~.;_t~&t::r~(?J{~~Rt~f.t~h~~rf?~~:~: ,.t\~;..~:-~:_:~<: -.'
'-~X5~~;h---~,'--~T.~:-;: ~.--
., .::. :....~.:..;..~..... .::........:.
~'..i.:':._...::.:: _ :.~ ".~.:::.: :""":-::,::,~;":i~':~--:-~:':::'~~.. ..:
.. .
~
V.fP
. .~.':~;~:i--" ':~( '::
: 'ir.ffi.'.:,, R E eEl V E D
. ,.",~"... . JUl' 281986,
'~l~~}; nU'"N PLAN~I~G
DUBLIN-.:ro:STAURANT SIGNS
INVENTORY: HOWARD JOHNSON HOTEL/LORD
. ,-
Sign i TYPE DESCRIPTION SIZE HEIGHT - LOCATION
1- Free "HOWARD JOHNSON 4' X 10' 10' Street
Standing LORD DUBLIN . Entrance
FINE DINING" .-
..
2. Wall "HOWARD JOHNSON" 17" X 21' ,30' ~-, North
Sign . (at bottom Elevation
of roof)
3. Wall
Sign
4. Wall
Sign
5. Wall
Sign
6. Wall
Sign
7 . Wa. 11
Sign
"HOWARD JOHNSON" I' X IS' 81"
"REGISTRATION" I' X 10' 57"
"LORD DUBLIN l' X 6' 70"
COCKTAIL LOUNGE" I' X 10' 70"
"LORD DUBLIN" I' X 4' 4 '
"RESTAURANT COCKTAILS" I' X 10'
"HOWARD 2' X 12' 24'
JOHNSON 2' X 14 ' 22'
HOTEL & SPA 18" X 17' 20'
LORD DUBLIN I' X 9' 18'
RESTAURANT" 18" X IS' 16'
"HOWARD I' X 12' 24'
JOHNSON" I' X 12'
East
East
South
South
1folest
"
All ~ ~!I.~ grf\~- ")
-.~ ftu"ftiLI~ I ~
l'~~~!ki~~~~_~~~ :I~n
. - _..-~----- .--.... .. --,,---,,--'-"--~
. . " . .'
~~}:~~i12~~:r~': ~~~'~~;r-',~:_-; ; -~;-':- ~":;~g~r~fi?~~~~4:~~~:~~~~f3fJ~x<~" ~ '.- .
--1 ~ I - f\
.1
" .'
-, - ---=~
::;...-.j
- ~-~::i~~J
F ree..sio... V'\d. (\~ 'S '':\''
'5+-re.e...+ €Y\~r",,, c::..e..
( fa-c.1 t1Cj 1(e,:\ \ 0 (\ CL~ S-t-.)
40 so- 9.\.. 'Sv'\<jkcVo>..u,J
1t I,-e,
fre..e.. ~o-V"\d.; ~ CS\') Y\
S.1-,-ee..-t tY\tro...r\t..e..
(FCU-l(\~ ?osk\~ Lo~)
40 sO' Q.~
'S', r\':}e.. ~~o...<:..e...d
-t 3 wed r rv..ov"~ e.d 'Si'1 n
66-r EIe.vcJ\oV"\
( f"-GI "-"1 t'o...rk.,,,"J l...k)
IS Sq, \;:t
(j
~.l-
\0 SO.\-'..
fuv..lo...C' 6. :Jehn.'SD r,
t> ,r (,
~il:j ,S';Yo..."C (\
~
-~
*-tf
LUCl.H
cA'51
f1;\.6U VI ~ e.6 OS [ c~ '(\
f(evC\....};;oV\
f(P ~. ~+.
~~7: .,;-~~~~~~"""-'--::;,J :f\:- SLUec.Jl 11\cl!~~e1 S~ Y\
~ ~I I,
-,ovt\-\ C'2.v'Gc.:flO V\
""-0.. ~+.
- ().
--r orA-/...
'i crA-L
*~
Wcd\
'5 C 0 -r'V\.
-rCI"'-C
It.;-
r,\o\Jy\~e.J s;~ r\
eJ <2-00--8" C':l <\
\ OCj S9 . N, .
C'
,~
(
'- ....-
.f!itl':;if~'1-;:'}o
~#il~f
r~~"""
4f:1
~cvu
VJc'5i
10lAL
r(\ov~lJ.. '51C<.V\
I
tf eVu...'h- DVI
Z'-f -S 'to ~.
'-lle\J
Sl~ (\
01\ '"D I
V \ \oyO"SU
\c:,(.,O-..\~oY\
\J \ e.,W 0 (: \l -("ayoS S6
Lc:c...~~o<\ '5,^cwi 1'\.\
'" e.l ~ "" ~
. ~: -,'
s\~ (\
0...W("c,,;~~
, .---!~ '_...,~ --::~"':':'/:'" -
'---,-- =.-::':::-=~-,c ..::.~~~~~ .~>~:
. . ...' .'-',', . -",- --==?:"i_ 'C:'~~\'\- /~'",~_
. --../ . . , .. . -. . . 'L... __. _, _" _ ~ -'\~. . .
-' ,-=--, :>, .' .'C', >".' '-,.. ~. ,"~ ""c.' C' ~~ ,,,,, r' ~,' _ )'" .'. .
"",-'\'~.-:':'_~. ~ '-- 'V-~"::'<';'V"""""." '\'('. '''''''/~~ . ._x.-.~!==::-:J':~;11G~==:~ ~/:~__.
'-~v/ ...----- "~ . " ". \~A ~ __:--;_ L. I~_ :........-_
..y /:::=: '~~.,. ".;, . .S ': '],-~" ,,=C.-'_.,.. . '../
"/:'-._;"(c -~~\ /- ~'.:, ::-- :'.... "~'~''.-'_' >, ~ _ 'C-=r ,1:- i~=::==i~L..- .__~ . /;::-
. , , ....----~.....;.>"C.\ ""'U.. .~ ''''-'We =_ ,
C'{>/.'.._ ,~ <-:: .' '. ':..\',,/~ . '~""~ l~~". // '..
"~L/,~ .. "".' ,.. /:"--'rc-c.'L:~" " " , ,/.~
.( =^'- cO'C:C--..'-o ""':,:, '/' 'h-, ~,,------~ _ ~ -v'-'l
;.~ -:::;-'-;{.-., .. ..:;",\,~~,~.~ c::::---=i, ~i' '....'.--",..'
" .. / --="~ - - '<'::'" ',"" ~, , '= ''''=:J F::?- " J...::......
-,...... : :::.::-:~. ~ } .,:,..'v~~ ~'1"-'_)r-."~f-i LL-, --':;-:;~'<\i:-_/,_\../"./.
~ ".nA'''''~RJf''-.~,W \-'rccC-..._""._, .,
" ~ /\ ///\. ''':':::-:-'''''!C)._ r>~~"0~/',c:.'0v~"-c/..//.//.
,...-... ~/:)., ~/ r.'A,\,\. .>:....';-\.;V""""'/~~~~?><:.;P!I \";"""':::';':<:::::""Y<V/ //.;:> .
;:.:::-:----::: -/. .... -- ,. ",.., ,..'- "';'0 '\...r.:'-7-----_': \- '.-02..'....... AV~''-'' " /" ..'. ~'.
. - .......- -=- ~ / - ,..--..,,/: " '\ ........\(,.:~. ..-)..~'" ~:,-: ( .::>....- -.......-, . /(, >.~ '. .
- - ..' '.....-::/::)...y""' ."("'.>, . : ,..,/'\,...' '. \... "'C<~0-,,--;,--, '......./' ,/ /;'/ v' . __"""~. '.
. /"" "~"".~'-::J.'<-:5 \ ,;,\-.,,;\:~\\\\\,:.~.y.!~.,. ~~~'-h! ~~f;;:-,\::(>,/..,,<<--;.<:.,<.,,:-,.
'-, /" - . ,;/ :....------.-/"'.., /, . ." /. ." -." ../ ,.. ,- - ~ 'VA"' / /);(:<v- / .. ." ',.
.......-. ..-.-.-..'.......' '/':' -. /" ....;, "/\:-:""..'\/<''''':-''-; : "-..r~'v, ! --::. '/\\..'~S'9 ,,_.........., '......,.;.,......, .
----- . .).~ ~ :-..~~ '. \.........-;.v......~,\..,'''~ '\'---: I.) ..\ \............ /''''''..............'''.,)~.
~._.-..-:._.~---_~l\~.:~.-, -'- - -- ---- ' -\ --./ ~ '. , . '_ -- " _""" ... v / V " " ., ,., ',. .
c. c' ___ '__'" _" "',,~.. ''',., ...., -. "( ,'"" .
c/, ~"'., /::;.. ;::~~~~E-::~i~~ ~~\$~~ \;;:--:':'::;;<;;<:(12"
-.- i:~. - :F.:,~~_.-=-.. ~~\=-.=~_ --. ,_ '__ := _ -...;~"""-v (:_ 'vII"'::.,:>". .;-c~, .:,.... ~~ / __ -(X):'///:, .>~...._. "......_
-.-- .' :"':-_'7~_'>'''\0o/~''-.,~Y\' ........,,--\ '):::>':>'-;:"">-'v"^
' .. ".~ ~ '-". /;,' "',. " ..., \. /.y /,' ,,,,',
--"'-" ...'.....':.'.. ~< -' "/h ~, _..., /'/'" "".,
' , .. -. '/, "',,' - -. '''' "''Xv'"'' '/\" . ,.~ '..
_:"<:-:_C;:'~S"";~,~% ~ ~' . \;.. \ 'v~';;'& C:'<f<:'i':S \
'-~~J-~ c:- ';~:~,;\::>~ ~~)\'\~""Yy~~~~
- c;= ::=,,' :, ~c._.,^, ~'\ '. I / <\ \......\ 0;,::\ -<" v'~~
.. f "\~/ '. '--"'. '\ ~\:::c(/);v,",~
~_' '\~~_'~~5.-.....\.,,>.,.,>:~.}::. '___________. -..........-,1. / ~...\.. /~ \\\,,,\/~,(/~,: _..:__'~
-.' -... .'.. - ~'\: .' \\..:-::.\. ...-/\. ~:':'7"
- /' '\.. / :..,...... \ " ',". " \,., ) -.-.
"-::"-: "/".-' '/ ' . / ,v.. ". 'y .....---.... ____,
::.- -::::.: ,,;;. ..~.. ~ ...... /' -- ..-, "V\:\,:,' ~<\ .-----::::-
" .....,-\ -~.~ .........- 'I. \":~'\\ .'.\\ .-
.- . / t2--.c-- ,....:::.:-:\ '... '/.............. \ ~\..,:- \ \/ ",. ,
- . ~""'-, ~', ...-:: .J ....,) , " '" \ \. \" i'"
-'"'-------;-./ -~'-'\ =- '.'>-./::::",--- ~';;::::-;\\'-- ~ \"'\'\\/,^'v'
'-"'/'" , '. .., r ' ....\/ \ "\',' '=,
~'" 'L--','.__----\:~..~\:\ \ ,\ \\.\"\~"->
' 'i ..../C' _ '. ..-' \..- ....----...<\ , , . , __, ~
"-",,y -- - '~. '" \ Y.. , "...--, '"......, .',
";\~3:?7~"'//~\ .......- : \...~...../,......- " .-- \\ .\..........->f ....:- .......:\ Ijr:/ '", '-::. . '________
' ''''','''' y' Y , .. c" '. ? \\....- __ .. 1/ ," , ,
y, v ~/ ........\' , . ......-:----~ ' . \ \ _______ '. ,
-:5:\~;:< '\ 'C::J (\ -- --r:)"~ 8~ <0........-8~\ /. ._ _' ~.
":CO., /~~::..~..., ~ r---\~ ~l _ '-r \ ".' _
~'''''''--:::-;:3-:~- \~3'---<' - ,;..-:;'., \' \\~\~\ _ '__'/'::;__'__" "_~.:__
::::\:::::-:"-~/~.... ....-r- \,\~.. '\~\ ~ _ ,,-::::"._._' .
:F39 ~"'S\. )-c:'-.,<[:" '.. ;.....------0">'.'<
~ / ' ...-s\' /;" "c'"".,.c, ',' ,,:.-c...... .
// '............., "'a::-: --.::........ __'_ '_,,, .
~~,,,=_r-:~~_,:;~~;~< 0 "
:~, ...
~
. .,
A iT A-eM-MENT3
.q r ('5 (f?f, rc. !vI Tb.