Loading...
1994-01 RESOLUTION NO. NE-94-01 . A RESOLUTION OF THE NEW ENCINITAS COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD OF THE CITY OF ENCINITAS APPROVING A DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT AND VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE REKODEL OF AN EXISTING CARLS JR. RESTAURANT TO A BOSTON CHICKEN RESTAURANT AND FOR 112 SQUARE FEET OF WALL SIGNAGE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 268 NORTH EL CAMINO REAL (CASE NO. 94-033 DR/V; APN: 259-121-21) WHEREAS, Carl Karcher Enterprises / Nancy Patterson applied for Design Review Permit approval pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 23.08 and for Variance approval pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 30.78 for wall signage to exceed the "1:1 ratio" [which would allow for a total of 75 s.f. of signage] and the "not to exceed 100 square foot" requirement to 112 square feet of wall signage for property located at 268 North EI Camino Real; and WHEREAS, the New Encinitas Community Advisory Board conducted a Public Hearing on the application requests on April 19 and May 17, 1994 and considered without limitation: 1. The Agenda Reports for the April 19 and May 17, 1994 New Encinitas CAB meetings; . 2. The Design Review Permit and Variance applications, the statement of Justification, the Elevation and site Plans (three pages) and other related material dated received by the City on March 16,1994, and the revised elevations plan dated received by the City on May 6, 1994 (one sheet); 3. The adopted General Plan, Zoning Code and associated Land Use Maps; 4. Written evidence and oral testimony received at the Public Hearing; and WHEREAS, the New Encinitas Community Advisory Board made the required findings pursuant to Section 23.08.070 (et. seq.) and Section 30.78.030 of the Encinitas Municipal Code: (See Attachment nl") NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the applications for Design Review Permit and Variance approval are hereby approved subject to the following conditions: . cd\cro\sr94033.ne2(OS-11-94) A. STANDARD CONDITIONS: . 1. This approval will expire on May 17, 1996, two years after the approval of this proj ect, unless the conditions have been met or an extension of time has been approved pursuant to the Municipal Code. 2. This approval may be appealed to the Planning Commission within 15 calendar days from the date of this approval. 3. At all times during the effective period of this permit, the applicant shall obtain and maintain in valid force and effect, each and every license and permit required by a governmental agency for the operation of the authorized activity. 4. At no time during the effective period of this permit shall the applicant be delinquent in the payment of taxes or other lawful assessments relating to the property which is the subject of this permit. 5. In the event that any of the conditions of this permit are not satisfied, the Community Development Department shall cause a noticed hearing to be set before the authorized agency to determine why the City of Encinitas should not revoke this permit. . 6. Upon a showing of compelling public necessity demonstrated at a noticed hearing, the City of Encinitas, acting through the authorized agency, may add, amend or delete conditions and regulations contained in this permit. 7. Nothing in this permit shall authorize the applicant to intensify the authorized activity beyond that which is specifically described in this permit and the application plans on file with the Community Development Department. B. ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS: 1. The Design Review Permit and Variance are approved as set forth on the plans received by the City with the application material on March 16, 1994 consisting of three sheets showing the site Plan, Floor Plan, and the Exterior Elevations; and the Revised Elevations Plan consisting of one sheet and dated received by the City on May 6, 1994 which are on file with the Community Development Department. 2. Wall signs shall be consistent with each other in color and material, shall conform to the approved plans, shall . complement the exterior building materials and shall be . submitted for Building Permit review and issuance prior to their installation. 3. within 90 days of this approval, the applicant shall submit revised drawings and amendments for Sign Program #91-204 SPRO for the subject shopping center. Said Sign Program amendments shall contain drawings of the Boston Chicken signage and a copy of this resolution of approval. 4. The square footage of all wall signs, including permanent window signs, shall not exceed 112 square feet and shall conform to the plans approved by the Community Advisory Board. 5. All roof and ground mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from view adjacent to the structure to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Trash bin areas shall be enclosed with decorative block walls or other material acceptable to the Community Development Director and shall be provided view obscuring gates. 6. Exterior illumination of the structure except for the approved signage and under the valance (awning) shall be . prohibited. 7. Landscape plantings within the immediate area of the remodeled structure shall be upgraded in the existing planting areas and the plant materials shall be maintained in a healthy and growing condition at all times. An automated irrigation system for the landscaping shall be in place and maintained in an orderly working condition prior to occupancy of the remodeled structure. 8. The majority of the structure's exterior (i.e.: the wood siding) shall be an off-white color as agreed to by the applicant. The stucco shall be a gray color and the accent bands shall be off-white (except for the red band). C. FIRE PREVENTION DISTRICT: The developer shall contact the Fire Protection District regarding compliance to the following conditions: 1. ADDRESS NUMBERS: Address numbers shall be placed in a location that will allow them to be clearly visible from the street fronting the structure. The height of numbers shall conform to Fire District standards. Note: Where . structures are located off a roadway on long driveways, . a monument marker shall be placed at the entrance where the driveway intersects the main roadway. Permanent address numbers shall be affixed to this marker. 2. FEES: Prior to Final Occupancy, the applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department a letter from the Fire Prevention District stating that all development impact, plan check and/or cost recovery fees have been paid or secured to the satisfaction of the Fire District. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the New Encinitas Community Advisory Board, as Lead Agency and in their independent judgement, finds this project to be exempt from Environmental Review pursuant to Section 15302(b) of the CEQA Guidelines since the project is for the remodel of an existing structure and for minor accessory structures (on-premises signs, etc.) which are not subject to Environmental Review. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of May 1994, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Beck, DeGaillez, Felker . NAYS: None ABSENT: Edde, weinstein ABSTAIN: None ~/ ~ f ..~~~ ~/ /;¿;Z:- Vir~iffÍa Felker, Chair of the New Encinitas Community Advisory Board, City of Encinitas ATë:~ (2.~ Craig R. Olson, Assistant Planner . ATTACHMENT "1" . RESOLUTION NO. NE-94-01 Findings Pursuant to Section 23.08.070 (et. seq.) of the Encinitas Municipal Code: Design Review Permits (1) The project design is consistent with the General Plan, or Specific Plan and the provisions of the Municipal Code. Facts: The subject restaurant use is a permitted use within the General Commercial Zoning District. The exterior modifications to the existing structure would not create any additional square footage to the structure nor require provisions for additional landscaping or parking spaces. Discussion: Available evidence has not identified any aspect of the submitted project which does not comply with Zoning Code standards or General Plan Policies. Conclusion: The New Encinitas Community Advisory Board finds, therefore, that the design of the project conforms to the policies and standards of the General Plan and Municipal Code. . (2) The project design is substantially consistent with the Design Review Guidelines. Facts: The Design Review Guidelines relate to site Design, Building Design, Landscape Design, Sign Design and Privacy and Secur i ty . The proj ect proposes to remodel an existing structure within a built shopping center. All aspects of site Design, Landscape Design and Privacy and Security will remain unchanged. Building Design issues affecting the remodel include consistency of the building's design with the architectural style of other buildings within the shopping center, variety and use of exterior building materials, and the screening of roof and ground mounted mechanical equipment. Discussion: The remodel proposes to utilize existing tile roof features on the structure which are a consistent feature throughout the shopping center. Approval of the application request would require screening of all roof and ground mounted mechanical equipment. Sign design relates to the Design Guideline issue that "Signs shall be of a size and scale with the building to which it is attached". The applicant contends that the proposed signage and placement of the signs relate to the structure since it is located on a "stand alone" building pad and all four building elevations are visible adjacent to the structure. . Conclusion: The remodeled structure will incorporate the tile . roof accent which is a common design feature throughout the subject shopping center. By retaining the tile roof feature, the building's remodeled design is consistent with the architectural style of other buildings within the shopping center. Signage is harmonious to the remodeled structure in that the structure is located on a "stand alone" building pad and all four building elevations are visible adjacent to the structure and the signs are of a size and scale that is compatible with the building to which they are attached. The sign colors and logo are compatible with other signage on structures within the shopping center. Therefore, the New Encinitas Community Advisory Board finds that the project design is consistent with the intent of the Design Review Guidelines. (3) The project design will not adversely affect the health, safety, or general welfare of the community. Facts: The project design is consistent with the existing shopping center in that no additional square footage to the existing structure is proposed by the remodel and all access and utility services to the shopping center are currently in place. Discussion: No evidence has been submitted to indicate that . the project design would adversely affect the health, safety, or general welfare of the community. Conclusion: Therefore, the Board finds that the project design will not adversely affect the health, safety or general welfare of the New Encinitas Community. (4) The project will not tend to cause the surrounding neighborhood to depreciate materially in appearance or value. Facts: The project design tends to be compatible with the style of commercial development wi thin the surrounding General Commercial Zoning District. Discussion: No evidence has been submitted to indicate that the project would materially depreciate the appearance or value of the neighborhood. Conclusion: Therefore, the Board finds that the project will not adversely depreciate the appearance or value of the immediate neighborhood or the New Encinitas Community. . . Findings Pursuant to section 30.78.030 of the Kunicipal (Zoning) Code Related to Variances (A) A Variance from the terms of the zoning ordinance shall be granted only when, because of the special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the zoning ordinance deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification. Facts: The application requests a Variance to permit additional wall signage area beyond the standard square footage permitted by the Sign Ordinance. The Sign Ordinance (Muni. Code Section 30.60 .100D 1) reads: "The maximum area for wall signs, including permanent window signs, on a single building exterior shall be calculated as: One sq. ft. per linear foot of building on the same side where the main entrance to the establishment is located with a maximum of 100 square feet". In accordance with this Code Section, a maximum of 75 square feet of wall signage would be permitted. Discussion: The applicant contends that a limit of 75 square feet of wall signage for this particular location and building is not justified since the building is located on a free- standing pad as opposed to an in-line commercial structure. . Due to this location, all four building exteriors are visible either to EI Camino Real and/or to the interior of the shopping center. Conclusion: Therefore, the New Encinitas Community Advisory Board finds that the site constraints imposed on the structure by its location on a "free standing" building pad and the visibility of all four building elevations warrants the Variance to the Sign standard for this particular location. (B) Any variance granted shall be subject to such conditions as will assure that the adjustment thereby authorized will not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is situated. Facts: The Variance allows for additional signage area beyond the signage area permitted by the Sign Ordinance. Discussion: The applicant contends that the additional signage is justified for this particular location due to the structure being located on a "stand alone" pad and the visibility of all four building elevations. Review of the application indicates that no conditions beyond those conditions normally applicable to Variance approval are . . necessary to assure that the Variance would not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such property is situated. Conclusion: Therefore, the Board finds that the Variance is warranted due to the particular circumstances of the subject structure discussed above and that the Variance approval does not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property is situated since similar circumstances may constitute grounds for Variance approval on other impacted properties. (C) A variance will not be granted for a parcel of property which authorizes a use or activity which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the zoning regulation governing the parcel of property. Facts: The General Commercial Zoning District permits restaurant uses as a right. Discussion: The project proposes the remodel of an existing restaurant to convert it to a similar but different type of restaurant use. . Conclusion: Therefore, the Board finds that the Variance does not authorize a use or activity which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the zoning regulation governing the parcel of property. (D) No variance shall be granted if the inability to enjoy the privilege enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification: 1. Could be avoided by an alternate development plan; which would be of less significant impact to the site and adj~cent properties than the project requiring a varl.ance; 2. Is self-induced as a result of an action taken by the property owner or the owner's predecessor; 3. Would allow such a degree of variation as to constitute a rezoning or other amendment to the zoning code; or 4. Would authorize or legalize the maintenance of any private or public nuisance. Facts: The project conforms in all aspects with the development standards of the General Commercial Zoning . District and all other applicable standards required by the . Municipal Code except for the additional square footage for signage requested by the Variance application. Discussion: The project design is compatible with similar commercial development in the area. This Variance approval has been conditioned to ensure compliance to all adopted development standards other than the area (square footage) limitations which are the subject of this Variance. The Variance is necessitated by the constraints on the property due to the location of the structure on a "free standing" building pad and, therefore, the Variance request is not self- induced. The name "Boston Chicken" contains 13 letters while other restaurants like Carls Jr. and Red Robin only contain 7 and 8 letters, respectively; thereby adding additional justification for Variance approval. The Variance does not constitute a rezoning or other amendment to the Zoning Code since restaurant uses are permitted by right in the General Commercial Zoning District. No evidence has been submitted to indicate that any private or public nuisance exists on the property. Conclusion: Therefore, the Board finds that the project does not impose any significant adverse impacts to the site and adjacent properties and that the Variance is not self-induced as a result of an action taken by the property owner or the . owner's predecessor. The proj ect does not allow such a degree of variation as to constitute a rezoning or other amendment to the Zoning Code nor has any evidence been submitted to indicate that the project would authorize or legalize the maintenance of a private or public nuisance. .