Loading...
PC Min 10/28/1986PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA 7:30 PM MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1986 The Planning Commission of the City of Campbell convened this day in regular session at the regular meeting place, the Council Chambers of City Hall, 70 N. First St., Campbell, California. ROLL CALL Present Commissioners: Dickson, Olszewski, Christ, Stanton, Kasolas; Planning Director A. A. Kee, Planner II Marty Woodworth, Planner II Tim Haley, Engineering Manager Bill Helms, Acting City Attorney Bill Seligmann, Recording Secretary Linda Dennis. Absent Commissioners Perrine and Fairbanks. Chairman Kasolas noted that Commissioners Perrine and Fairbanks absences were excused. APPROVAL OF MINUTES M/S: Christ, Stanton - That the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of October 14, 1986 be approved as submitted. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Kee noted that communications received pertained to specific items on the agenda and would be discussed at that time. Chairman Kasolas reminded the Commission of the Planning Commissioner's Forum to be held Thursday, October 30, 1986. ARCHITECTURAL APPROVALS S 86-18 Continued application of Frank and Diane Youngblood, F. Youngblood for approval of plans and elevations to allow the construction of a small office building, with access off an alley, on property known as 2210 S. Winchester Blvd. in a C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. Commissioner Olszewski reported that this application was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending approval with the added condition that a lighting plan come i back to the Planning Director for approval. ~l -2- Commissioner Christ asked about intrusion on nearby residential privacy. Commissioner Stanton questioned the ownership of the alley. Mr. Helms indicated that the alleyway was under private ownership. Commissioner Dickson indicated that the intrusion is minimal due to the distance from adjacent residences. M/S: Dickson, Olszewski - That the Planning Commission adopt the attached findings and approve S 86-18, subject to conditions indicated in Staff Report of October 28, 1986, and the additional condition that a lighting plan be submitted for the approval of the Planning Director. Motion carried with a vote of 4-1-2, with Commissioner Stanton voting "no", and Commissioners Perrine and Fairbanks being absent. S 86-19 Application of Mr. Marty Paisley for Paisley, M. approval of plans and elevations to allow construction of an industrial building located on property known as 786 McGlincey Lane in an M-1-S (Light Industrial) Zoning District. _ Commissioner Olszewski reported that this application was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending a continuance at the request of the applicant. M/S: Christ, Olszewski - That S 86-19 be continued to the' Planning Commission meeting of November 25, 1986 at the request of the applicant. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). PUBLIC HEARINGS S 86-20 Public hearing to consider the Brown, W. application of Mr. William Brown to move a single family residence to property known as 388 Virginia Ave. in an R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Commissioner Olszewski reported that this application was considered by i the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending approval with redlining addressing the driveway approach, __ fencing, sideyard setbacks and a 21' setback in the frontyard to be consistent with existing homes in the neighborhood. Additionally, the structure is to be painted within 90 days of occupancy. -3- Mr. Kee noted that Staff is in concurrence with the recommendations of the Site and Architectural Review Committee. Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. No one wishing to speak, it was M/S: Stanton, Olszewski - That the public hearing on S 86-20 be closed. Motion. carried unanimously (5-0-2). M/S: Olszewski, Christ - That the Planning Commission adopt the attached findings and approve S 86-20, subject to redlining of presented plans, and conditions indicated in Staff Report dated October 28, 1986. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). V 86-03 Public hearing to consider the Walker, J. application of Mr. and Mrs. James Walker for a variance to the front yard setback from 15 feet to 13.5 feet for property known as 231 Ken Circle in an R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. Chairman Kasolas noted correspondence regarding this item from Mr. Rodney Engdahl (attached hereto). Commissioner Dickson indicated that the Site and Architectural Review Committee did not have the benefit of this correspondence at its meeting, and noted that this information changed his recommendation. Additionally, Commissioner Dickson questioned the legality of allowing such a variance when there appeared to be a deed restriction prohibiting the requested setbacks. Mr. Seligmann responded that any action taken by the Commission has no affect on whatever rights would arise under this particular declaration, nor does this particular declaration limit the City's rights. Chairman Kasolas stated that the Planning Commission's job is to rule on the variance application only. Commissioner Olszewski stated that the correspondence from Engdhal would not change his recommendation for approval. Chairman Kasolas indicated that since there are conflicting recommendations from the Site and Architectural Review Committee, the item is before the Commission without a recommendation. -4- Commissioner Christ asked if the proposed addition fronted to Sunberry Drive or Ken Circle. Mr. Kee responded that the proposed addition was on the Sunberry Dr. side; however, the home fronted on Ken Circle. Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Mr. Rodney Engdahl, 357 Sunberry Dr., stated that his understanding of the deed restrictions for this tract is that the setback can only be changed by a vote of the property owners. Commissioner Kasolas explained that the Planning Commission has no authority regarding enforcement of deed restrictions, and can only act on issues within the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Kee indicated that the requested variance is actually for 18" at the maximum, and that varies because of the lot configuration. There being no one else wishing to speak, it was M/S: Olszewski, Stanton - That the public hearing on V 86-03 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). M/S: Olszewski, Stanton - That the Planning Commission adopt the attached findings and adopt a Resolution approving V 86-03, subject to conditions as indicated in the Staff Report dated October 28, 1986. Motion carried (3-2-2, roll call vote.) Discussion on motion Commissioner Olszewski stated that he is in favor of granting this variance because the lot is irregular. Commissioner Dickson stated that the lat was not irregular, and if the homeowner had chosen to reduce his plans by 1-1/2 feet, he would not need the variance. The problem is, in Commissioner Dickson's opinion, self-imposed. Commissioner Christ stated that, in his opinion, this is not an unusual circumstance, and to grant the variance would be detrimental to the neighborhood. Chairman Kasolas stated that he would be voting in favor of the motion because he felt that improvement to one's home indicated pride in the community and should be encouraged. ___ -5- Vote on motion AYES: Commissioners: Olszewski, Stanton, Kasolas NOES: Commissioners: Dickson, Christ ABSENT: Commissioners: Perrine, Fairbanks. ZC 86-12 Public hearing to consider the PD 86-12 application of Messrs. Bruce Bowen and Bowen/Wyatt Jeffery Wyatt for a zone change from R-1 (Single Family Residential) to PD (Planned Development/Low-Medium Density Residential), and approval of a Planned Development Permit, plans, elevations, and development schedule to allow the construction of 2 single family homes on property known as 649 E1 Patio Dr. Commissioner Olszewski reported that this application was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending approval with the addition of fencing, which is redlined on the presented plans. Mr. Kee noted that Staff is also recommending approval. Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. There being no one wishing to speak, it was M/S: Christ, Olszewski - That the public hearing on ZC 86-12/PD 86-12 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). M/S: Olszewski, Christ - That the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council accept the Negative Declaration which has been prepared for this project; and, that the Planning Commission adopt the attached findings and adopt a Resolution recommending that the City Council approve this project, subject to conditions indicated in the Staff Report dated October 28, 1986. Motion carried unanimously with the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners: Dickson, Olszewski, Christ, Stanton, Kasolas NOES: Commissioners: None ABSENT: Commissioners: Perrine, Fairbanks. -6- PD 86-09 Public hearing to consider the -- Zankich, S. application of Mr. Steve Zankich for a Planned Development Permit, plans, _ elevations, and development schedule to allow the construction of 12 apartment units on property known as 77-81 Dot Ave. in a PD (Planned Development/ Medium Density Residential) Zoning District. Commissioner Olszewski reported that this application was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending a continuance with the concurrence of the applicant. Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. No one wishing to speak at this time, it was M/S: Christ, Stanton - That the public hearing on PD 86-09 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of November 11, 1986,. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). UP 86-14 Public hearing to consider the Brink, T. application of Mr. Tim Brink and Ms. Vicki Lou Hillig for a Use Permit to increase the intensity of a restaurant by increasing seating from 23 to 45 seats and approval of on-sale beer and wine in an existing building on property known as 422 E. Campbell Ave. in an Interim (Planned Development/Commercial) Zoning District. Mr. Woodworth reviewed this item, noting that the application before the Commission at this time is to allow an increase in intensity so as to accommodate 45 seats, and also to allow on-sale beer and wine. Staff is recommending denial of the request to increase the intensity to 45 seats, because the required parking cannot be accommodated, and approval of the beer and wine request. Chairman Kasolas asked if Bridgett's restaurant provided on-site parkingf and how one use with 40-50 seats could be allowed and not another one with fewer seats. Mr. Kee indicated that Bridgett's occupied their building at the same intensity as the previous use in the building. The applicant could also occupy his building at the same intensity as the previous use by limiting his seating capacity. Additionally, Mr. Kee noted that the subject building is not within the parking district. - -7- Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Mr. Tim Brink, applicant, stated that there is plenty of parking in the area - just across the street there is a parking lot where very few spaces are used. Mr. Brink continued that he is trying to open a small luncheonette which will serve the downtown businesses. Most of the traffic will be walk-in, and he needs the 45 seats to make the business economically feasible. Discussion ensued regarding parking in the downtown area, .the parking district, and the availability of public parking. Chairman Kasolas suggested that the item be continued and that the applicant discuss the parking issue with Staff. Commissioner Olszewski stated that the intended walk-in traffic could, in his opinion, be a reason why the parking code requirements may not apply in this particular instance. There being no one else wishing to speak at this time, it was M/S: Olszewski, Christ - That the public hearing on UP 86-14 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of November 11, 1986. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). The Commission recessed at 8:20 p.m.; the meeting reconvened at 8:37 p.m. TA 86-03 Continued public hearing to consider a City initiated proposed text amendment to Sections 21.41.130 & 21.41.140 of the Campbell Municipal Code modifying the review procedure of applications for change of use, construction, demolition, relocation or material change in an Historic District. Mr. Tim Haley, Planner II, reviewed this item for the Commission. Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Mr. Monty Smith, 136 Alice Ave., asked about fees, conditions, difference between Use Permit and Special Development Permit, and how the ordinance will be enforced if adopted. -8- Mr. Haley indicated that the proposed ordinance would apply to all historic districts. The proposed ordinance provides for a procedure to distinguish minor changes in buildings from a use permit procedure, thereby providing the applicant with a less time-consuming method. The Historic Preservation District has recommended that no fees be charged for a Special Development Permit; however, this decision is up to the City Council. Discussion continued regarding types of changes which would constitute maintenance or physical changes to the. structure; procedures that a homeowner would follow; the percentage of property owners necessary to request an historic district; and, the difference between a Use Permit and a Special Development Permit. Mr. Kee noted that Staff did not initiate this item; however, in light of all the questions, the Commission may wish to consider setting up a study session with the residents of Alice Ave. Commissioner Christ gave some background on this issue, noting that the proposal for an historic district was one of the items suggested by the Historic Preservation Task Force. At the time, there was approximately 60$ of the residents on Alice Ave. interested in forming an historic district. Commissioner Christ indicated that he clearly understood the text of the proposed ordinance, and was in favor of making a recommendation this evening. Commissioner Olszewski stated that he was also ready to vote on a recommendation at this time. Commissioner Dickson stated that he would be in favor of a study session, and a continuance until a study session was held with the residents. Commissioner Stanton stated his agreement with Commissioner Dickson. Commissioner Christ noted he would agree with a study session with the residents to help them understand the ordinance and how it affects their properties. However, he felt that a study session to discuss the contents of the ordinance was unnecessary in that the ordinance has not been changed - just clarified. There being no one else wishing to speak, it was M/S: Dickson, Stanton - That the public hearing on TA 86-03 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of November 25, 1986. Discussion on motion Commissioner Christ stated that he could not support the motion for reasons indicated previously. Commissioner Dickson felt that this was the first time the matter had really been discussed. -9- Commissioner Olszewski indicated that he would agree with a continuance if a time was determined prior to the continued date for an informal meeting __ with the public, Civic Improvement Commission, City Council and Planning Commission. At this time, it was M/S: Olszewski, Christ - That the motion for continuance be amended to include: That the Planning Department notify appropriate civic groups of a study session meeting prior to November 25, 1986. Motion for amendment fails with a vote of 2-3-2. Vote on motion Motion for continuance carried with a vote of 3-2-2. The Commission recessed at 9:10 p.m.; the meeting reconvened at 9:18 p.m. ZC 86-10 Continued public hearing to consider a HPB 86-01 City-initiated zone change from R-1 City-initiated Single Family Residential) and/or P-O (Professional Office) to R-1-H and/or P-O-H (Historical Overlay Zoning District) for the Alice Avenue Neighborhood (all properties having frontage on Alice Ave.: 20 through 235 Alice Ave., 235 S. First St., 189 & 190 S. Third St., 2200 S. Winchester Blvd.). Mr. Kee noted that, in light of the action taken on TA 86-03, the Commission may wish to continue this item. Commissioner Dickson asked if this proposed district would be covered under the existing ordinance, noting that restrictions should not be added after the fact. Mr. Seligmann stated that TA 86-03 is a procedural ordinance for making property .modifications that would affect any historic district adopted. In that sense, there is a relationship between TA 86-03 and ZC 86-10. Mr. Haley added that the text amendment would not be before the Planning Commission if the Historic Preservation Board had not recommended changes to the ordinance; however, the Board did recommend changes to the ordinance under one action, and recommended an historic district for Alice Avenue under a separate action. -10- Chairman Kasolas asked why a Negative Declaration has been prepared for this application. Mr. Haley responded that a Negative Declaration is recommended by Staff because the residences on Alice Ave. are currently zoned R-1 (Single Family) and would remain the same under the historic district. The impact of the district would be negligible from a development standpoint. Commissioner Christ asked if Staff would still have the same recommendation in light of not having an amended ordinance at this time; and, for discussion of the procedure for change under the existing ordinance. Mr. Kee indicated that the Commission could take action on this item this evening, as far as establishing an historic district. However, from a standpoint of having an existing ordinance being proposed to be changed, it would seem that a property owner on Alice Ave. would be interested in knowing what the ordinance was and its affect. Commissioner Stanton stated that he is not convinced that the residents on Alice Ave. want to become an historic district; therefore, he would move that there be a recommendation for denial. Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. Commissioner Christ stated his agreement with Commissioner Stanton, noting that this is the item which should be set for a study session with the _ residents. There was brief discussion about renotifying Alice Ave. residents if this item is continued. It was the consensus of the Commission that the item not be renoticed. M/S: Christ, Olszewski - That the public hearing on ZC 86-10 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of November 25, 1986. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). PD 86-07 Continued public hearing to consider the Anderson, K. application of Mr. Kurt Anderson for approval of a Planned Development Permit, plans, elevations-and development schedule to allow an addition to an industrial building on property known as 190 Dillon Ave. in a PD (Planned Development/Industrial) Zoning District. -11- Mr. Haley reviewed this application for the Commission, noting that Staff is recommending approval in that the applicant has satisfactorily addressed previously expressed concerns. Chairman Kasolas opened the public hearing and invited anyone in the audience to speak for or against this item. There being no one wishing to speak at this time, it was M/S: Dickson, Christ - M/S: Dickson, Christ - Discussion on motion That the public hearing on PD 86-07 be closed. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2) . That the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council accept the Negative Declaration which has been prepared for this project; and, that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution (incorporating the attached findings) recommending that the City Council approve this application, subject to the conditions indicated in the Staff Report dated October 28, 1986. Commissioner Olszewski asked about the creekside elevation, noting that he has not reviewed the presented plans sufficiently enough to be convinced that the 15' retaining wall is the best solution for the situation. Mr. Haley explained that the retaining wall will vary in height from 2 ft. to 15 ft.; there will be 15 feet of planting area between the wall and the par course; and, the proposed wall materials are timbers. At this time, it was M/S: Christ, Dickson That the motion for approval be withdrawn; and, that the public hearing on PD 86-07 be reopened. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). M/S: Christ, STanton - That the public hearing on PD 86-07 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of November 11, 1986 and that this item be referred to the Site and Architectural Review Committee for recommendation. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). -12- MISCELLANEOUS MM 86-25 Request of Mr. Fred Chan to consider a ZC 86-04 modification to a previously approved Chan, F. plan to permit the conversion of 3 garage spaces .into storage rooms for a 4-unit townhome project located on property known as 1430 W. Latimer Ave. in a PD (Planned Development/ Medium Density Residential) Zoning District. Commissioner Olszewski reported that this application was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending a continuance to the meeting of November 11 with the applicant's concurrence. M/S: Olszewski, Christ - That MM 86-25 be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of November 11, 1986 with the applicant's concurrence. Motion carried unanimously {5-0-2). SA 86-53 Sign application - 900 E. Hamilton Ave. Prometheus Dev. Co. PD (Planned Development/Commercial) Zoning District. Commissioner Olszewski reported that this application was considered by the Site and Architectural Review Committee. The Committee is recommending approval with an added condition that all other existing signs on the property be removed prior to the erection of the proposed sign. Commissioner Christ stated that he thought this sign was only appropriate while the project is under construction, and he would also like a provision that this sign be taken down when the project is ready for occupancy. Mr. Todd Wright, applicant, noted that he will need to keep a small sign identifying the R-V use on the site for a few months; however, he will agree to removing all the other existing signage prior to erecting the proposed leasing sign. After brief discussion, Mr. Wright stated that he will come back to the Commission for an application for an R-V sign. -13- M/S: Christ, Olszewski - City Council Referral Air Quality Element That the Planning Commission approve SA 86-53, subject to conditions indicated in the Staff Report of October 28, 1986, with the added conditions that all existing signage be removed from the property prior to erection of SA 86-53, and that the sign approved under SA 86-53 be removed no later than 120 days after project is ready for occupancy. Motion carried unanimously (5-O-2). Staff Report regarding the Air Quality Element proposed for the General Plan. M/S: Olszewski, Christ - That this item be agendized for public hearing on January 27, 1987; and, that the matter be given further study by Staff and Commission prior to the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously (5-0-2). Chairman Kasolas appointed Commissioner Olszewski to serve on this study committee, and asked Staff to contact Commissioners Perrine and Fairbanks to see if one of them would also serve. OTHER ITEMS BROUGHT UP BY COMMISSION Commissioner Dickson noted his concern with correspondence received from the Landscape Advisor, and reviewed in the Site and Architectural Review Committee meeting. nn.Tnrrnuturt. ram There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:05 p.m. APPROVED: George C. Kasolas Chairman ATTEST: Arthur A. Kee Secretary RECORDED: Linda A. Dennis Recording Secretary RECOMMENDED FINDINGS FILE NO: S 86-18 SITE ADDRESS: 2210 S WINCHESTER BLVD. APPLICANT: YOUNGBLOOD, F. PC MTG: 10-28-86 1. The proposed office use is a permitted use in the C-2-S (General Commercial) Zoning District. 2. The provided 7 parking spaces satisfies the number of spaces required for an office use. 3. The project design is considered acceptable by Staff and the Architectural Advisor. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: S 86-18 APPLICANT: Youngblood, F. SITE ADDRESS: 2210 S. Winchester Blvd. P.C. MTG. 10-28-86 The applicant is notified as part of this application that he/she is required to meet the following conditions in accordance with the Ordinances of the City of Campbell and the Laws of the State of California. 1. Revised elevations addressing redlining to be submitted to the Planning Department and approved by the Planning Director prior to application for a building permit. 2. Property to be fenced and landscaped as indicated and/or added in red on the plans. Landscaping and fencing shall be maintained in accordance with the approved plans. 3. Landscaping plan indicating type and size of plant material, and location of irrigation system to be submitted to the Planning Department and approved by the Site and Architectural Review Committee and/or Planning Commission prior to issuance of a building permit.. 4. Fencing plan indicating location and design details of fencing to be submitted to the Planning Department and approved by the Planning Director prior to issuance of a building permit. 5. Applicant to either (1) post a faithful performance bond in the amount of $3,.000.00 to insure landscaping, fencing, and striping of parking areas within 3 months of completion of construction; or (2) file written ._. agreement to complete landscaping, fencing, and striping of parking areas. Bond or agreement to be filed with the Planning Department prior to application for a building permit. 6. Applicant to submit a plan to the Planning Department, prior to installation of PG&E utility (transformer) boxes, indicating the location of the boxes and screening (if boxes are above ground) for approval of the Planning Director. 7. All mechanical equipment on roofs and all utility meters to be screened as approved by the Planning Director. 8. Building occupancy will not be allowed until public improvements are installed. 9. All parking and driveway areas to be developed in compliance with Chapter 21.50 of the Campbell Municipal Code. All parking spaces to be provided with appropriate concrete curbs or bumper guards. 10. Underground utilities to be provided as required by Section 20.16.070 of the Campbell Municipal Code. 11. Plans submitted to the Building Department for plan check shall indicate ~ clearly the location of all connections for underground utilities including water, sewer, electric, telephone and television cables, etc. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: S 86-18 APPLICANT: Youngblood, F. SITE ADDRESS: 2210 S. Winchester Blvd. PAGE 2. 12, Sign application to be submitted in accordance with provisions of the Sign Ordinance for all signs. No sign to be installed until application is approved and permit issued by Planning and Building Departments (Section 21.68,030 of the Campbell Municipal Code). 13. Ordinance No. 782 of the Campbell Municipal Code stipulates that any contract for the collection and disposal of refuse, garbage, wet garbage and rubbish produced within the limits of the City of Campbell. shall be made with Green Valley Disposal Company. This requirement applies to all single-family dwellings, multiple apartment units, to all commercial, business, industrial, manufacturing, and construction establishments. 14. Trash container(s) of a size and quantity necessary to serve the developanent shall be located in area(s) approved by the Fire Department. Unless otherwise noted, enclosure(s) shall consist of a concrete floor surrounded by a solid wall or fence and have self-closing doors of a size specified by the Fire Department. All enclosures to be constructed at grade level and have a level area adjacent to the trash enclosure area to service these containers. 15. Applicant shall comply with all appropriate State and City requirements for the handicapped. 16. The applicant is hereby notified that the property is to be maintained free ._. of any combustible trash, debris and weeds, until the time that actual construction commences. All existing structures shall be secured by having windows boarded up and doors sealed shut, or be demolished or removed from the property. Sect. 11.201 & 11.414, 1979 Ed. Uniform Fire Code. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 17, Obtain an excavation permit, pay fees and post surety to modify driveway approach. 18,~Submit three copies of the on-site grading and drainage plans for review by the City Engineer. 19. Execute an agreement with the City covering the improvement and maintenance of the adjacent portion of the alley and grant of a license~to the public for additional access to the alley. FIRE DEPARTMENT 20. One-hour occupancy separation required between parking and office space above. BUILDING DEPARTMENT No comments at this time. _ PLANNING COMMISSION 21. Lighting plan to come back to Planning Director for approval. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FILE NO: SA 86-53 SITE ADDRESS: 500 E. HAMILTON AVE. APPLICANT: PROMETHEUS DEVELOPMENT CO. P. C. MTG.: 10-28-86 1. Applicant to obtain any permits required by the Building Department. 2. Precise location of sign to be approved by the Public Works Department. 3. All existing signing on the property to be removed prior to erection of this sign. 4. This sign to be removed within 120 days of project being ready for occupancy.