HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/17/1988, A-C-10 - RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION-JOHN KELLERMAN & MAXINE LEWIS & CONTINUATION OF REXALL DRUGSTORE SIGN APPEAL ' 9- NG AGENDA
DATE ITEM #* (•W
MN 17, ree
7: llvan
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
RESOLUTION
OF APPRECIATION
RESOLUTION NO. (1988 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SAN LUIS OBISPO EXPRESSING THE CITY'S
APPRECIATION TO JOHN L. KELLERMAN
FOR HIS DEDICATED SERVICE TO THE
CITY AND IT'S CITIZENS
WHEREAS, John "Jack" L. Kellerman has had a long and
distinguished career with the City of San Luis Obispo Building
Inspection Division, totaling 22 years, having started May 1, 1966;
and
WHEREAS, Jack has served as Chief Building Official,
effectively guiding the building inspection and code enforcement
program with dedication and committment; and
WHEREAS, Jack has established a fair, firm and consistent
enforcement and inspection program widely respected throughout the
Central Coast area; and
WHEREAS, Jack has served as President of the Central Coast
Chapter of the International Conference of Building Officials, where
he has been considered to be a leader in the profession by his peers
in jurisdictions throughout Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo
Counties; and
WHEREAS, Jack's fellow employees have found him to be a loyal,
trusted, and dedicated employee of the City, who is admired for his
perserverence and technical knowledge; and
WHEREAS, retired building officials have been known to keep a
book of correction notices in their back pocket as they travel about
"their" community; and
WHEREAS, Jack leaves behind an excellent, well-trained building
inspection organization geared to serve the citizens with integrity,
competence; and effectiveness; and
.�.: NOW, ..THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this City Council wishes to
express its grateful appreciation to Jack Kellerman for 22 years of
dedicated service to the citizens of San Luis Obispo and wishes him
well:-.-,in his retirement.
S
MEETING AGENDA
DATE MAY 17 "88 ITEM
of. Sal'1 �,11S O�1S n; Odnucip ,Q � win
tution
of . a
�Ec�aion
RESOLUTION NO. 6436 (1988 Senie6)
EXPRESSING THE CLTY'S RECOGNITION AND GRATITUDE
FOR THE DEDICATION AND COMPASSION OF MAXINE LEWIS
FOUNDER AND DIRECTOR OF GRASS ROOTS
WHEREAS, Maxine Lema'atu the bounden and Diteetbn ob .the San Luis Obizpo Gna66
Root6 ongani.zati.on and opened. .et6 dooAz bon 6enviee ,in the mid 1960'6; and
WHEREAS, Maxine Leuti.6.and Gmbh Rooth II pn.ovi,ded emengeney hood and 6hetteh to
h.omeee ,& .ind.ividuue.6 and 6amitlie6 thkoughout San Luiz Ob.i.6po County; and.
WHEREAS, Maxine Lewi6 •and Gk"6 Rooth II phovided a t4anzpontation pn.ognam to
homebound, bA&U elderly needing. medical, nut4itional on 6jaihi teal 6enviee6; and
WHEREAS, . Maxine Lewte and G2a6.6 Root6 II o66ened an annual Thankzgiv.ing D.ennen.
bon hundned6 o6 needy indivi.dual6 and bamitie6 6xom thtoughout ouh eommunitia; and
WHEREAS, Maxine Lelui.6 is &eeognized by .local community bated onganizationz,
non-pto6it gnoup6, 6ehv.i.ce-ptovi.dea.6 and bu6.ine6.6 teaden.6 a6 a compa66.ionate,
dedi.cated.and commtte.d',indk%yidual; and
WHEREAS, Maxine Lex" inQAoved the quest ty o6 .lite bon disadvantaged botlzs in
San Lui.6 Obi.6po to en6uhe"hanmon,iou,6 "2ation6 between all people negandle66 o6 4aee,
exceed on di.6abUi ty.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, duct .the Cc.ty Couneit appaee i.a te6 and xeeogn ize6 �
the many aeeompti6hment6 o6 Maxine Lewib in the City ob San Lu,i.6 Obi.6po oven .the pa6t
tfvicee deeadu.
CITY CLERK PAMELA VOGES MAYOR RON DUNIN
152 s
S
MEETING AGENDA)
DATE ma„ 'as , ITEM
Al tuis OMS =Ll
Clt 0 s )v/)...y
,
tution
of. A. .,,,: pQccl.Ation
RESOLUTION NO. 6436 (1988 SeAie6)
EXPRESSING THE CLTV'S RECOGNITION AND GRATITUDE
FOR THE DEDICATION AND COMPASSION OF MAXINE LEWIS
FOUNDER AND DIRECTOR OF GRASS ROOTS
WHEREAS, Maxine Lewi6 was the bounden and DitectoA o6 .the San Lui.6 Obispo GAa.6s
Roots oAganization and opened its dooA6 6o,% 6envice in the mid 1960'x; and
WHEREAS, Maxine Leati.e.and GAass Roots 11 pnov.ided emehgency Good and shetten .to
homeee.66 .indivi.dua.Ee and 6amiti.eb Votoughout San Luis Obispo County; and.
WHEREAS, Maxine Lewi6 •and Gaas6 Roots 11 pnovided a fihun6pontation pnogAam to
homebound, 6Aai.0 eZdeA4 needing. med&at, nutJri bona. oh 6piki teat zeAvice6; and
WHEREAS, Maxine Lewin and GAazz Roots 11 o56eAed an annuat Thanksgiving DinneA
6oA hundAed6 o6 needy .in.divi.duatz and 6amili.ez 6nom .throughout ouA communitiea; and
WHEREAS, Maxine Lewis ,ib Recognized by .ZocaZ community based onganizati.ona,
non-pro6.ct g4oup6, 6eAv.Lce=phovi.densand business .Zeadeu as a comp"zionate,
dedica ted.and. committe d ind i%t duaZ; and
WHEREAS, Maxine Lew.i6\.xpAoved the quat ty o6 ti.6e '6oA di6advantaged 6otk6 in
San Luis Obispo :to ensure"harmon.ious utati.onz between aP.-P. people AegandZess o6 Aace,
creed on di6abit ty.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, .dont .the City Councit appneacate6 and Aecognize6 j
the many accompei.6hment6 o6 Maxine Lewis in .the City o6 San Lui.6 Obispo oveA .the past
fihree decades.
I
I
i
CITY. CLERK PAMELA VOGES MAYOR RON DUNIN
152 A
MEETING AGENDA
DATE MAY 17 'eb ITEM #
of tuisoBsW)"Po
Cly
Tu:pa.'mll jaa i''u1yin�ia_.:� � 33
'r=L:.,v�• a,, ""=' 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403.8100
M E M O
May 10, 1988
TO: City Council ^
FROM: Michael Multari, Community Development Director t \
SUBJECT: Continuation of Rexall Drug Store Sign Appeal
The City Attorney has suggested that this item be continued to June 6
so that he can be in attendance because there are potential legal
complexities related to sign issues which may warrant his presence
for advice and consultation.
Accordingly, I recommend that this item be continued to your next
meeting. This action will not violate any mandatory deadlines for
action.
���A
city osAn
tuis oBispo
; i" 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403.8100
(805) 549-7140
May 9, 1988
MEMORANDUM
To: dn6mm&mWj6r City Administrative Officer 1
From: Roger Picquet, City Attorney —rz �� J
Subject: Rexall Sign Appeal
This is set for Council meeting of May 17, 1988. I will still be on
active duty. Due to the complexity of the subject matter (sign issues are
always sticky) and the possible legal issues such as validity of earlier
Council action, no requirement for compensation and legality of
amortization period, I recommend this appeal be continued to next
available Council meeting after the public hearing, or put over at this
time administratively so I may be present.
The timelines set forth in SLOMC §1.20.040 (appeals) are directory and not
mandatory on the City. In any event, just a thought.
RP:ajr
c: Community Development Director
City Clerk
(dictated but not read)
lllry^`�uI��III��I�^ ,V,I�I MEETING DATE:
III II fl ,ullul
city ofSan1 Luis OBISpO 5-17-88
MINGO COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER:
FROM: Michael Multari, 'Community Development Director; BY: Gary Price, Associate Planner
SUBJECT:Appeal of an Architectural Review Commission decision denying an exception to
allow a non-compliance freestanding illuminated and rotating pole sign and
continuance of a non-compliance wall mounted channel letter sign for Rexall Drug
Store at 717 Marsh Street.
CAO RECOMMENDATION
Deny the appeal on the pole sign and deny the exception for the wall sign.
DISCUSSION
The city adopted an amended set of sign regulations in July of 1980 intended to improve
the city's visual environment. Among the changes were restrictions which made two signs
at the Rexall Drug Store at the northeast corner of Marsh and Broad Streets non-conplying
(refer to attached ARC report for details). The new standards set an abatement program
into effect which identified non-conforming signs throughout the city. The new
regulations amortized these signs, including Rexall's signage, requiring them to be
brought into compliance over a period of time. This period assured that the signs
realized their full value prior to their removal. The Rexall sign amortization period
expired in September of 1987. The applicant submitted for the sign exception request on
March 29, 1988 to allow the continuation of the non-compliance signs. A history of
Rexall's sign amortization period is attached for reference.
On April 18, 1988 the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) voted unanimously to deny the
exception for the pole sign indicating that there were no exceptional circumstances which
would justify exceptions to the sign regulations. However, the wall mounted sign was
continued to allow for possible redesign in compliance with the sign regulations. The
applicant subsequently filed an appeal to both actions of the ARC requesting City Council
to consider exceptions for both signs as they exist. As justification to allow for the
signage exception, the applicant is requesting that the pole sign be designated a
"Landmark Sign". The Sign Regulations do not address "Landmark Signs". To approve the
signs as they exist requires specific findings to be made, such as there are special or
exceptional circumstance to the sign or site that would justify exceptions to the sign
regulations.
The applicant in his appeal states "It is a sad state of affairs when a city
administration will not honor a contract entered into by a previous city
administration." The "contract" referred to was the original Sign permit issued
September 29, 1963 and a Planning Commisssion Use Permit approved July 16, 1963 allowing
the freestanding pole sign provided it was non-flashing and non-rotating. See attached.
The Sign Regulations address the abatement of non-conforming signs in Sections 15.40.170
thru 15.40.200. See attached.
Staff is recommending denial of both non-compliance signs with the reasons noted in the
attached ARC staff report.
The council has several action options available as follows:
a. Deny the appeal and take an action to deny the wall sign.
Result: Removal of the pole and wall signs.
I-I
b. Deny the appeal and refer the wall sign back to ARC for further review _.
Result: Removal of the pole sign and redesign of wall sign based on further
deliberation by the ARC.
c. Uphold the appeal and take action to approve the wall sign.
Result: Maintenance of the existing pole and wall signs.
d. Uphold the appeal and take action to deny the wall sign.
Result: Maintenance of the pole sign and removal of wall sign.
SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
The project is categorically exempt from environmental review as on-premise signs. Staff
expects no significant environmental, fiscal, or service impacts from denial, approval of
the proposed project, or approval of a project revised (wall sign) as directed by the
ARC. The processing of exemptions and appeals does involve significant staff time
(approximately 9 staff hours in this one case).
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT TAKING RECOMMNENDED ACTION
Relaxation of sign regulations may encourage owners of other non-complying and new
businesses to pursue exemptions and appeals; owners of complying signs may be encouraged
to request exceptions and/or changes to standards for equity purposes
Attached: Draft Resolutions
Appeal Form to City Council
ARC minutes; 4-18-88
Record of Sign Amortization Period for Carpenters Rexall Drug Store
ARC staff report; 4-18-88
Sign Permit & Planning Commission Use Permit issued in 1963
Sign Regulations Sections 15.40.170 - 15.40.200
Letter in Support by Holdak M. Truesdale
Enclosures: Sign Plan Package
gp/rexall-cc