Laserfiche WebLink
151 <br /> AGENDA (continued) ACTION TAKEN (continued) <br /> PUBLIC HEARINGS (continued) PUBLIC HEARINGS (continued) <br /> 2. (continued) commented and replied to questions relating to <br /> the requirements of the sign ordinance; its <br /> relationship to the Highway Beautification Act; <br /> the normal maximum sign size of 150 sq. ft.; <br /> the reasons for the setback requirement; and <br /> the Council's authority with regard to such <br /> appeals. <br /> Jack Haig, 6 Rinconada Circle, Belmont, repre- <br /> sentative of Syufy Theatre, advised he is <br /> looking into the matter of debris in the <br /> theatre area. <br /> City Attorney Schricker explained that the duty <br /> of Council in an appeal of the sign ordinance <br /> is to determine if the Building Official <br /> correctly applied the requirements of the <br /> ordinance, but that no variance procedure is <br /> involved, and the Council cannot grant changes. <br /> Mr. Schricker pointed out that if Council <br /> wishes to make any change which might permit <br /> the use of the sign, then the proper action <br /> would be to direct a generally applicable <br /> change in the sign ordinance. <br /> Lengthy discussion followed concerning the <br /> history of citizen, Planning Commission and <br /> Council participation in adoption of the sign <br /> ordinance; the difficulties in making excep- <br /> tions which might involve undesirable signs <br /> being permitted; the apparent satisfaction <br /> of citizens with the ordinance during its <br /> ten-year existence; whether location near a <br /> freeway might justify reduced setback; and <br /> Council's desire to upgrade the area near <br /> Highway 101. <br /> Mayor Rhodes invited anyone else present who <br /> wished to speak to do so. No one wished to <br /> speak. <br /> "'"" M/S: Chandler/Norris to uphold the decision <br /> of the Building Official in denying the appli- <br /> cation of Arrow Sign Company and Syufy <br /> Owe Enterprises for a sign permit pertaining to <br /> 555 East Bayshore Boulevard, and to approve <br /> the following findings in support thereof <br /> in that the sign applied for: (1) does not <br /> qualify for the area allowable under Redwood <br /> City Code Section 3.122(b) in that it does <br /> not meet the setback required; (2) does not <br /> qualify for the 150 square foot maximum <br /> allowable area permissible under Redwood City <br /> Code Section 3.99 in that the sign applied <br /> for is 282 square feet in area; and (3) does <br /> not qualify for the 150 square foot maximum <br /> allowable area for wall signs under Redwood <br /> City Code Section 3.102, if the sign were <br /> deemed a wall sign, in that the sign applied <br /> for is 282 square feet in area. <br /> Carried unanimously by roll call vote. <br /> MINUTE ORDER NO. 80-19 <br /> Reg.Mtg. <br /> 2/11/80 <br /> Page 2 <br />