Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 11-05-1984 r ` J ~ . Regular Meeting - November 5, 1984 A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on November 5, 1984, in the Meeting Room, Dublin Library. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Cm. Alexander, Chairman. * * * * ROLL CALL PRESENT: Commissioners Alexander, Petty, Barnes, and Raley, and Thomas P. DeLuca, Associate Planner. Commissioner Mack was absent. * * * * PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Cm. Alexander led the Commission, Staff, and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. * * * * MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING The minutes of the regular meeting of October 15, 1984, were approved as written * * * * ORAL COMMUNICATION None * * * * WRITTEN COMMUNICATION The Commissioners noted the letter from Kaliedoscope Center. No formal action was taken on this letter. * * * * UNFINISHED BUSINESS Review of Sign Regulations Mr. DeLuca presented the Staff Report, which examined the following six issues: Regular Meeting PCM-4-116 11/5/84 I . ~ ~ • 1) Potential solutions to the Village Parkway sign problem 2) Sign regulations in frontyard setbacks 3) Nonconforming signs 4) Signage for promotional events 5) Multiple signs for automobile dealerships 6) Signs for multi-story buildings Mr. DeLuca noted that the sign problem along Village Parkway is more a function of the irregular development pattern than the sign regulations. Many of the business and office uses along Village Parkway simply do not have any street exposure. What is needed along Village Parkway is a series of attractively- designed, tenant directory signs that both identify the businesses and direct the shoppers to the businesses. Sign regulations in front yard setbacks have not been much of a problem since most of the commercial areas of the City do not have a front yard setback. However, the C-2-B-40 Zoning District which covers a portion of Dublin Boulevard and most of Village Parkway, has a 30' front yard setback. Mr. DeLuca noted that after the new sign regulations are adopted, many existing signs will become nonconforming, either by size, height, or location. Reference was made to a recent State Law that requires a legislative body to pay for the removal of nonconforming signs that the City requires to be removed. It was noted that the City Attorney would have to review the State Law and how it relates to the new Sign Ordinance. Signs for promotional events were discussed, specifically how many events seemed reasonable for any one store. Multiple signs for automobile dealerships were also discussed. Six cities were surveyed with respect to their regulations for multiple signs on a single lot. In most cases, only one free standing sign was allowed per lot. Signs for multi-story buildings were discussed with respect to how high off the ground a sign should be allowed. Mr. DeLuca noted that a distance of 15' off the ground seemed appropriate. Chairman Alexander opened the public hearing. Mr. Woolverton, representing Crown Chevrolet, addressed the Planning Commission. Mr. Woolverton displayed an aerial photograph which showed the intersection of I-580 and I-680 in the 1950's. Mr. Woolverton stated that he was pleased with how Dublin has grown and that signage is very important, particularly to the small businessmen. Regular Meeting PCM-4-117 11/5/84 ~ ~ No one else spoke on the Sign Regulations. Chairman Alexander closed the public hearing. Commissioner Petty asked whether a standard design for directory signs along Village Parkway could be developed. Chairman Alexander reinforced the need to combine the Zoning Districts in the new Sign Ordinance for easy reference. Chairman Alexander also felt that 2 sq. ft. per tenant was too small and that 3 sq. ft. would be more appropriate. Commissioner Raley asked what the purpose of the C-2-B-40 Zoning District was and what the schedule of the Sign Regulations would be. Mr. DeLuca stated that he would research the establishment of the C-2-B-40 Zoning District and report back at the next Planning Commission Meeting. It was the concensus of the Planning Commission that they needed to hear additional testimony from the business groups in Dublin in order to make accurate decisions on the Sign Ordinance. Mailing notices to the individual tenants and/or landlords in the affected areas was discussed. It was the concensus of the commission to continue this item to the December 3, 1984 meeting. * * * * OTHER BUSINESS Many of the commissioners expressed interest in attending the Joint Planning Commission Meeting in the City of San Ramon on November 15, 1984. * * * * ADJOURNMENT Adjourn to Joint Planning Commission Study Session at 7:30 p.m. on November 15, 1984 at the San Ramon City Hall, 2222 Camino Ramon, San Ramon. Respectfully submitted, P1f nin Commission Chairman ~~'G'~~ g Laurence L. Tong, Planning Director * * ~ * Regular Meeting PCM-4-118 11/5/84