Loading...
Resolution 13282CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. 13 2 8 0 DENYING THE APPEAL OF AMIR SOHRABI AND UPHOLDING THE PLANNING BOARD'S DENIAL OF VARIANCE, V -00 -14 FOR 2200 OTIS DRIVE WHEREAS, an application was made on June 1, 2000 by California Sign for Burger King, Incorporated, requesting a Variance, V -00 -14 to permit more than one freestanding sign per lot and more than two signs per street frontage, in the C -2 -PD (Central Business Planned Development) Zoning District; and WHEREAS, the application was accepted as complete on June 27, 2000; and WHEREAS, the subject property is designated Co Diagram; and munity Commercial n the General Plan WHEREAS, the Planning Board held a public hearing on this application on July 24, 2000 and has examined pertinent maps, drawings, and documents; and WHEREAS, on August 17, 2000, by Amir Sohrabi, filed a requesting that the City Council conduct an appeal hearing; and imely appeal ith the City WHEREAS, on October 3, 2000, the City Council held a public hearing and examined pertinent maps, drawings and documents, as well as the record of the Planning Board hearings; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the staff responses to the bases of the appellants' appeal as set out in Attachment 2 to the staff report, which attachment is hereby incorporated by reference, and finds that there is no merit in the bases of appeal; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Alameda makes the following findings with respect to the appellant's bases of appeal and relative to the Variance to the proposed sign requirements pursuant to Subsection 30 -6.3.a of the Alameda Municipal Code: 1. There are no extraordinary circumstances applying to the property relating to the physical constraints of the parcel, such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings because; There are no extraordinary property related constraints because the lot is not unusual in any respect and the signs of the site are consistent with signs of businesses in the vicinity. 2. Because of extraordinary circumstances, the literal enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance standards would not result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship such as to deprive the applicant of a substantial property right possessed by other owners of the property in the same district because; There is not an extraordinary circumstance which results in a practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship because the applicant has sufficient signage for the commercial site. The denial and subsequent removal of one freestanding monument sign at this site would not represent the deprivation of a substantial property right. 3. The granting of the Variance, under the circumstances of the particular case, will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to persons or property in the vicinity because;` Staff does believe the finding can be made. The granting of the Variance would not likely be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to persons or property in the vicinity. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council finds that the project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, under Section 15311(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, On- premise signs; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City of Alameda hereby determines that one of the existing freestanding monument signs at the property addressed 2200 Otis Drive is to be removed, at the applicant's discretion, within thirty (30) days of the City Council action, or unless an extension is approved by mutual agreement with the City and applicant, so that the signs of the site will be in conformance with Section 30 -6.3 of the Alameda Municipal Code. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council denies the appeal and upholds the Planning Board's denial of Variance, V- 00 -14. NOTICE: No judicial proceedings subject to review pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.5 may be prosecuted more than ninety (90) days following the date of this decision or final action on any appeals plus extensions authorized by California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in regular meeting assembled on the 3rd day of October , 2000, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: Councilmember Johnson - ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: None. IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and a 4th day of October , 2000. Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt and Kerr - 3. Mayor Appezzato - 1. Revised 10 /10 /00 xed the official sea Di re Felsch, City Clerk City of Alameda CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. 13 2 81 AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN OPEN MARKET CONTRACT PURSUANT TO SECTION 3 -15 OF THE CITY CHARTER FOR JACKSON PARK RENOVATION PROJECT PHASE 1, NO. P.W. 05 -00 -10 WHEREAS, on bid opening date September 25, 2000, the City did not receive any bids for the Jackson Park Renovation, Phase 1, No. P.W. 05 -00 -10 project, despite using appropriate advertising procedures; and WHEREAS, in the current expansive construction climate rebidding the project will not necessarily attract additional contractors; and WHEREAS, open market negotiation will complete the project expeditiously and economically; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 3 -15 of the City Charter, the City Council may, by four (4) votes, acquire a contractor in the open market for public work or improvements, in case no bids are received. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Alameda, that pursuant to Section 3 -15 of the City Charter, the City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to negotiate on the open market and execute a contract for the Jackson Park Renovation, Phase 1, No. P.W. 05- 00 -10. * * * * * * I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in regular meeting assembled on the 17th day of October , 2000, by the following vote to wit: AYES: Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt, Johnson, Kerr and Mayor Appezzato - 5. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTENTIONS: None. IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said City this 18th day of October , 2000. Di Fne Felsch, City Clerk City of Alameda CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. 13282 APPOINTING FRANK MATTERRESE AS A MEMBER OF THE CITY PLANNING BOARD BE IT RESOLVED4oy the Council of the City of Alameda that pursuant to the provisions of Article X of the Charter of the City of Alameda, and upon nomination of the Mayor, FRANK MATTERRESE is hereby appointed to the office of member of the Planning Board of the City of Alameda to fill the unexpired term of Eugenie P. Thomson, commencing October 17, 2000 and expiring on June 30, 2002 and to serve until his successor is appointed and qualified. * * * * * I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in regular meeting assembled on the 17th day of October , 2000, by the follo-wing vote to wit: AYES: Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt, Johnson, Kerr and Mayor Appezzato - 5. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTENTIONS: None. IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said City this 18th day of October , 2000. Diane Felsch, City Clerk City of Alameda