04-03-1972 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

DRAINAGE ASSESSMENT FEES The Mayor opened the public he aring on the proposed revision to the Drainage Assessment Fees Schedule of the Public Services and Facilities Element of the General l~lan. There were no proponents or opponents. The Clerk reported no written communi- cations had been received, and the Mayor closed the public hearing. ORDINANCE NS-1116 AMENDING SANTA ANA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 34-193 RELATING TO LOCAL DRAINAGE AREA FEE SCHEDULE was passed to second reading on motion of Councilman Herrin, seconded by Councilman Patterson, and carried on the following roll call vote: AYES: Herrin, Patterson, Villa, Evans, Griset, Yamamoto; Markel NOES: None ABSENT: None APPEAL #298 The Mayor opened the public hearing on VA 72-16 Appeal #298 filed by Interstate Brands INTERSTATE BRANDS CORPORATION Corporation appealing the Planning Commission's denial of VA 72-16 to construct one rotating pole sign and two roof signs for on-premise advertising in the C M District at 2430 S. 1V[ain Street. The Director of Planning stated that the building involved has a very thick roof which the applicant indicates is a canopy; that there is no definition of canopy in the Code; that Staff and the Planning Commission have agreed that this 6' projection is actually a hard top roof; that the applicant has the choice of one pole sign or one roof sign on the property; that Staff is willing to accept the letters on the canopy as the roof sign, and the pole sign is well within the limitations of height and area; but that both signs would be in vidlation of the Code. Mr. Bob Tichenor, 19021 Chadbourne Lane, Santa Ana, representing the owner, stated that the building is presently under construction; that this will be a retail bread store; that there will be a revolving pole sign and canopy lettering; and he submitted a picture of the building. He further stated that the canopy is part of the basic building design and is very necessary in preventing the bakery products from getting too much sun; that it does not protrude over the public area, but extends 6' out over the building; that the revolving pole sign will be a~proximately 100 square feet, and the lettering on the canopy 140 square feet; that the total combined area is well within the sign ordinance limits; ~nd they would like to have the Council's approval. Mr. Earl Malotte, Architect, 2051 E. Cerritos Avenue, Anaheim, stated that the lettering on the canopy is an integral part of the building; that be had titled to design a sign that was unobtrusive; that the ordinance would allow a wall sign, which they could make twice as big without a variance~ and they felt this should be taken into consideration in making the judgment. There were no opponents in this matter. The Clerk reported no written communications had been received, and the Mayor closed the public hearing. In response to a question from Councilman Patterson, the Planning Director stated that the applicant was allowed one sign by the Planning Commission, but not both. CITY COUNCIL -144- April 3, 1972