HomeMy WebLinkAbout020-85BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL Of' THE CITY Ol: ORNUZLLE
In the Matter of Upholding >
the Rppeal of Diablo Bank )
and Prudential-Bache )
Securities from the )
Decision of the Planning )
Commission Denying L}AR 84--23>
RESOLUTION NO_ Z0-85
[)n November- 1.3, 198q, 'the Planning Commission denied gRR 84-223
for a multi-tenant freestanding sign at 156 Diablo Road;
On November 19, 1984, Diablo Bank (ouner) and Prudential-'Baclhe
Securities (applicant) thr'ough their attorneys, Thiessen, Gagen
McCoy, appealed the decision to City Council;
Rfter giving the notice required by law the City Council held a
public hearing on February 2!1, 1985;
Rt the public hearing, the City Council received statements from
a].l persons desiring to be heard;
'[he City Council having heard and considered presentation by
City staff, the statements of the parties ,appealing the decision
and all members of the public desiring to be heard; and
The City Council having examined the documentary evidence
submitted in support of the appeal and in support of the
decision of the Planning Commission and being fully aduised 'zith
reference to all matters in connection uith the appeal;
'[he City Council of 'the City of Banville 'finds, determines and
orders as follows:
I ,,.
The findings of 'the City Council in the matter of the appeal
by Diablo Bank and Prudential-Bache Securities from the
decision of' the Planning Commission are as follows:
a .
]'he multi--tenant use freestanding identification sign
variance will not constitute a grant of special
privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other
properties in the vicinity or ~dth the RB-.S2 zone in
which the subject property is locate<;
b .,,
Because of special circumstances relating to the
building space location and surroundings, the strict
appi±cat±on of Zon±ng Ordinance Section 88-9..1002(g) is
found to deprive the subject property of rights enjoyed
by other properties 'in the vicinity end uithin the
identical land use district;
C
The variance 5ubstantia'llM meets 'tile intent and purpose
of t. he J~B'-S'Z zoning district in which the subject
propet'-t9 is located_
d ,.
The proposed multi-tenant f'reestanding sign will not be
detrimental '[o the heslth, safeiv or- public uelf'are of
the cor~munitM.
URR 84--'Z4 is approved and the appeal from -he decision of
the Planning Commission .i.s uphe].d..
PASSED RNO ADOPT£D this rebruarV 21, 1985, b,/ 'zhe following
vote:
AYES=
NOES=
Lane, May, McNeely, Offenhartz, Schlendorf
RBSENT=
ABSI'AIN:
RTTESI'=
MR¥OR