HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Mtg Minutes 08-05-1985
« ~ ~
Regular Meeting - August 5, 1985
A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was
held on August 5, 1985, in the Meeting Room, Dublin Library. The
meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m, by Cm. Alexander,
Chairman. The "late" start of the meeting resulted from the
length of the joint meeting of the Park Commission and Planning
Commission (7015 p.m. to 8;10 p.m.).
* * * *
ROLL CALL
PRESENT; Commissioners Alexander, Barnes, Petty, Mack, and
Raley, Laurence L. Tong, Planning Director and Kevin J. Gailey,
Senior Planner.
* * * *
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 July 15, 1985, were not
available.
* * * *
ORAL COMMUNICATION
None
* * * *
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
Staff indicated that two written communications dealing with the
Sign Ordinance Regulations were received (letter of August 2,
1985, from Valley Datsun and letter of August 2, 1985, from Ozzie
Davis). Staff indicated that a copy of a letter to the editor
dated August l, 1985, regarding the proposed irradiation plant ad
been enclosed in the Commission's packet for their review.
* * * *
PCM-5-90
• ~ ~
PUBLIC HEARING
SUB.TECT: 7.1 PA 85-058 Jav & Veena Kinhal Conditional Use
, Permit to allow the continued operation of a
daycare center for a maximum of 16 children at
7872 Oxbow Lane.
Cm Alexander opened the public hearing. Mr. Tong indicated that
the applicant had requested that the public hearing on this item
be continued to allow revisions to the plan. Consistent with
this request, Staff recommended that the item be continued to the
Commission hearing of August 19, 1985.
Cm. Alexander asked the Commission if they concurred with the
applicant's reguest. It was the consensus of the Commission to
continue the item to the hearing of August 19, 1985.
* * * *
SUBJECT: 7.2 PA 85-064 Love & Care Daycare Conditional Use
Permit to allow the continued operation of a
daycare center for a maximum of 20 children at
7624 Hillrose Drive.
Cm. Alexander opened the public hearing. Mr. Tong presented the
staff report indicating that the request dealt with a 20-child
daycare in a R-1-B-E District which had been originally approved
by Alameda County on July, 1982. The permit had expired on ,7uly,
1985. Mr. Tong indicated that Staff typically supports renewals
of this type of permit if no noise, traffic or similiar
complaints had been received. Staff recommended approval of the
Conditional Use Permit.
Mr. Brewer, husband of the operator indicated that for
clarification purposes it should be noted that the business was a
preschool, not a day care.
Mrs. Brewer, operator of the preschool briefly described how the
preschool operated.
Cm. Raley indicated that consistent with the previously expressed
desires of the Commission, he wanted a condition imposed that
would require that on at least an annual basis that the preschool
operators have a Child-Abuse informational counseling program
presented to the children at the preschool. The programs
offerred through John Knox and the Dublin Police Services were
discussed.
On motion by Cm. Barnes, and seconded by Cm. Raley, and on
consensus, Cm. Alexander closed the public hearing.
On motion by Cm. Petty, seconded by Cm. Barnes, and by unanimous
vote the Planning Commission voted to approve the request,
modified to indicate its operation was a preschool, not a
daycare, and to include a Condition regarding a child abuse
counseling program;
PCM-5-91
j i •
RESOLUTION NO. 85-043
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING PA 85-065 LOVE & CARE DAYCARE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
APPLICATION TO ALLOW THE CONTINUED OPERATION OF
A DAYCARE CENTER AT 7624 HILLROSE ROAD
* * * *
SUBJECT: 7.3 PA 85-061 Sign Technology Conditional Use
Permit to relocate a directional tract sign to the
northwest corner of San Ramon Road and Silvergate
Drive.
Cm. Alexander opened the public hearing. Mr. Tong gave the staff
report indicating the chronology of the requests by Kaufman &
Broad for offsite subdivision signs. This request was described
as a request to move a sign from the southwest corner of San
Ramon Road and Silvergate Drive (because of the Arbor Creek
project construction) to the northwest corner of the
intersection.
Nancy Tiege, with the firm of Sign Technology, requested
direction from the Commission as to whether a seperate,
subsequent request for a third off-site sign for the project
might be considered.
Mr. Tong indicated that the original request had been for three
signs, but had been approved for just two signs.
On motion of Cm. Raley, and seconded by Cm Petty, and by
consensus, Cm. Alexander closed the public hearing.
On motion by Cm. Raley, and seconded by Cm. Mack, and by
unanimous vote, the Planning Commission voted to approve the
request with modified conditions to allow the option of a
double-faced sign to be used (24 sq. ft, maximum each side);
RESOLUTION NO. 85-044
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
APPROVING PA 85-061, SIGN TECHNOLOGY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
REQUEST TO RELOCATE AN OFFSITE DIRECTIONAL TRACT SIGN TO THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF SILVERGATE DRIVE AND SAN RAMON ROAD
* * * *
SUBJECT: 7.4 PA 84-077 Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Regarding Sign Regulations (continued from
Planning Commission meetings of May 6, May 20,
June 3, July l5 and July 18).
PCM-5-92
~ ~
Cm. Alexander opened the public hearing. Mr. Gailey opened the
Staff Report by indicating that along with the brief
Supplemental Staff Report, Staff had supplied an updated copy of
the "Working Copy" of the draft regulations of the sign
ordinance. The "Working Copy" addressed the ordinance up to
Section 6.0 - Exempt or Permitted Signs.
Initial discussion involving the "Working Copy" centered on the
modified language in Section 4.3-Freestanding Signs. Per the
Commission's direction, Staff had surveyed parcel sizes of
commercial properties in the City looking for an appropriate
parcel site for use as a threshold to allow higher signs (20' to
35'). Staff advised that the appropriate threshold appeared to
be four acres, which would involve approximately 39 parcels, or
groupings of parcels (180 of the commercial holdings in the
City).
Extended discussion followed regarding the purpose and intent of
using such a threshold, and discussion of uses that would or
would not be included if the four acre threshold was utilized.
The Commission directed Staff to further adjust Section 4.3 to
provide the option of requesting higher signs (20' to 35') to
parcels four acres and greater and single-use parcels 1.5 acres
and greater in size. It was determined that the request for
higher signs should be processed through the Conditional Use
Permit process.
Staff continued discussion of the "Working Copy" by describing
the introduction of the proportionality clauses into Section 4.3
which would tie the total area of a sign to the sign's height.
Additional changes in the remainder of Section 4 were discussed.
In discussing Section 5- Prohibited Signs and Locations, Staff
advised that no changes were indicated to the "Working Copy" of
the regulations, but Staff was aware that members of the audience
were present who would like to discuss 5.0 g) as regarded the
prohibition of all painted signs. Various members of the
business community with businesses along Village Parkway
presented testimony of this matter. Mr. Tong indicated that the
City Attorney had advised that further review of this matter, as
pertains to recent litigation, would be necessary before this
section was finalized.
The major adjustments in Section 6.0 - Exempt or Permitted Signs
were indicated as involving 6.0 t) Open-house Signs. Staff
advised that the so-called "flagrant violater clause° (6.0 t). 4)
would still require review and input from the City Attorney.
Discussion began on the next section of the draft regulations (
7.0-Review of Signs with Staff indicating sub-section by sub-
section what was addressed in this portion of the draft
regulations. Discussion on this section resulted in direction to
Staff to delete sub-section 7.5c) Advertising Sign and sub-
section 7.5g) Off-premises Business Signs.
PCM-5-93
J • .
Extensive discussion centered on the sub-section dealing with
Administrative Conditional Use Permits for temporary signs. The
direction of the Commission regarding this matter was to retain
the Administrative Conditional Use Permit process for use of
temporary signs used up to a maximum cumulative period of 30 days
annually, with a restriction of 14 consectutive days for any
single promotional event using temporary signs. The direction
was given to utilize the Conditional Use Permit process for use
of temporary signs up to a maximum cumulative period of use of 60
days annually, with the same 14 day maximum consecutive day
restriction. I
Due to the lateness of the hour, the Commission continued the
discussion on the remainder of the draft regulations to the
Commission meeting of August 19, 1985.
* * * *
OLD BUSINSS
None
* * * *
NEW BUSINESS
None
* * * *
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
9.1 Status Report: PA 85-016 Charles Lemoine
Mr. Tong presented the staff report providing a brief summary of
the project's chronology, discussion of the .Tuly 30th Staff
inspection which revealed three uses on the site which had not
been moved out as required, and Mr. Lemoine's written request for
another extension of the move-out date. Mr. Tong indicated Staff
was recommending that the request for a one-month extension be
denied due to the history of the project leading up to the latest
request.
Cm. Alexander asked if anyone was present to speak on the item.
No one indicated a desire to speak on the matter.
On motion of Cm. Raley, and seconded by Cm. Barnes, and by
Consensus, Cm. Alexander closed the public hearing.
On motion of Cm. Mack, seconded by Cm. Barnes, and by unanimous
vote, the Planning Commission denied the request for the one-
month extension and directed Staff to proceed with the standard
zoning enforcement action.
PCM-5-94
+ ` ~ •
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' CONCERNS
None
* * * *
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at
11:35 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
~ . . ~
P annin C ission Chairman
9
Laurence L. Tong,
Planning Director
* * * *
PCM-5-95
I~ .