Loading...
1990-08 . . . RESOLUTION NO. OE90-08 A RESOLUTION OF THE OLD ENCINITAS COMMUNITY ADVISORY BOARD APPROVING A VARIANCE AND DESIGN REVIEW REQUEST TO ALLOW TWO ILLUMINATED FREESTANDING SIGNS (ONE OFF-SITE) AND A SIGN PROGRAM FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 581-617 WESTLAKE STREET (CASE NUMBER 90-036V/DR) WHEREAS, a request for consideration of a Variance and Design Review permit was filed by Lightmark Pacific for Mr. Frannk Rayle and Mr. Sherman Peters to allow a two freestanding monument signs (one off-site) as opposed to the one allowed under code, with both being illuminated, and design review for a sign program, per Chapters 30.60, 30.78 and 23.08 of the City of Encinitas Municipal Code, for the property located at 581-617 Westlake st., legally described as: Portions of lots 19 and 20 of Rancho Requeza, in the County of San Diego, State of California, according to the Map thereof No. 2133, filed in the Office of the San Diego County Recorder. WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on the application on April 12 and May 17, 1990, and; WHEREAS, the Community Advisory Board considered: 1. The staff report dated March 30,1990; 2. The application, site plan and sign plan, and of Justification submitted by the applicant; 3. Oral evidence submitted at the hearing; 4. Written evidence submitted at the hearing; and statement WHEREAS, the Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board made the following findings pursuant to Chapters 30.60, 30.78, and 23.08 of the Encinitas Municipal Code: (SEE ATTACHMENT "A") NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board of the City of Encinitas that application 90-036V/DR is hereby approved subject to the following conditions: (SEE ATTACHMENT "B") BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board of the City of Encinitas that: This project was found to be exempt from environmental review under Section 15311 (a) of the State CEQA Guidelines. . . . PASSED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of May, 1990, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Birnbaum, Rotsheck, Steyaert, Tobias, Townsend NAYS: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None r~ \ ~ ~--- Peter To ias, Chairman of the Old Encini tas Community Advisory Board ATTEST: ~------ //~ -----;::?' / -------'- ~C---~-- Tom Curriden Associate Planner . ATTACHMENT "AII RESOLUTION NO. OE90-08 FINDINGS FOR A VARIANCE AND DESIGN REVIEW Findings: What follows are the findings of fact the Board must make to approve the variance request pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Sect. 30.78.030: A. A variance from the terms of the zoning regulations 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 regulations deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under the same zoning classification. . Evidence to consider: The special circumstance applicable here is that Mr. Rayle's property is located back and away from the public right-of-way with no street frontage apart from the access easement road, a condition not typical of most commercial establishments. This deprives the tenants of the amount of sign exposure that would be more typical of these types of businesses elsewhere. The placement of the monument sign in the embankment fronting Westlake and the easement road is the best location for such a sign because the only alternative location for a monument sign on Mr. Rayle's property (were it entitled to one) would be within the access driveway. It is also the opinion of staff and the Board that this finding can be made to allow the second monument sign, since Mr. Rayle's tenants will consume approx. half of the area of the larger monument sign and the fact that the athletic club has nearly 300 ft. of frontage along the sweeping "S" turn within Westlake. The directional signs have been reduced in area to conform with code and thus no longer required the variance. 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 same vicinity and zone in which such property is situated. . Evidence to consider: The atypical location and surroundings of the subject property (i.e. its location back and away from the public right-of-way) is the justification for the variance and thus the requested variance would not be applicable to most other properties . and would not represent a grant of special privilege. 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 regulations governing the parcel of property. The provisions of this section shall not apply to use permits. Evidence to Consider: Uses on the subject property are either legal or legal nonconforming uses, none of which are proposed to be changed through this application. 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 adjacent properties than the project requiring a variance. 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 consti tute a rezoning or other amendment to the zoning code; 4. Would authorize or legalize the maintenance of any public or private nuisance. Evidence to consider: (1) There is no alternative strategy which would avoid a variance and still provide Mr. Rayle's tenants with the degree of sign exposure typical of such commercial uses. with less than the required 75 ft. of frontage, those tenants can not have the freestanding sign typically enjoyed by others, and even if one were allowed the only al ternati ve location would be within the access driveway. (2) The need for the variance is a result of the property's location and surroundings, not the result of any action taken by the applicant or the applicant's predecessors. (3) The variance would not be of such a variation as to constitute a rezoning or amendment. degree of z one code (4) The variance would not legalize maintenance of any public or private nuisance. . Findings for Design Review . The following findings must be made by the authorized agency to warrant approval of the design review permit in accordance with Sect. 23.08.072 of the Municipal Code: A. The project design is consistent with the General Plan, a Specific Plan, or the provisions of this code. Evidence to consider: Subject to concurrent approval of the associated variance to in effect allow the 2 illuminated monument signs, with one being an off-site, this proposal will be in conformance with the Municipal Code and General Plan. No Specific Plan is applicable. B. The design is substantially consistent with the Design Review Guidelines. . Evidence to consider: The guidelines applicable to signs are guidelines 4.1 through 4.7 in Section IV of the Design Review Guidelines. wi th regard to those guidelines, the signs are of a high quality, durable construction. In that they are not interior lit, the signs should avoid excessive contrast. The Board may wish to review with the applicant the size of the lettering to be used in order to be sure that they will not take on a cluttered appearance and proj ect their message clearly. Board members may wish to review sign colors with the applicant, samples of which will be available at the hearing, for compatibility with building colors. In summary, it is the opinion of staff and the Board that the signs are in substantial compliance with the City's adopted design criteria. C. The project would not adversely affect the health, safety, or general welfare of the community. Evidence to consider: The project is minor in nature and no aspect has been identified which would adversely affect the health, safety, or general welfare of the community. D. The proj ect would tend to cause the surrounding neighborhood to depreciate materially in appearance or value. Evidence to consider: The project represents an upgrade to the appearance of the property and thus would cause no depreciation to the appearance or value of the neighborhood. . 8 8 8 - Applicant: Case No: Subject: Location: 1. RESOLUTION NO. OE90-08 STANDARD CONDITIONS ATTACHMENT liB" Lightmark Pacific 90-036V/DR Condi tions of Approval Review for Sign Program for Variance and Design 581 Westlake Street A. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS B. C. D. Prior to final approval, the owners of subject properties shall execute and record a covenant agreeing to the provision and maintenance of the off-site signing allowed hereunder, and setting forth all other terms and condi tions of this permit to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department. Prior to final approval, all nonconforming freestanding and wall signs shall be removed to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department. The approved signs shall not be illuminated during hours in which none of the subject businesses are open, and shall, at a minimum, not be illuminated between 2 a.m. and 6 a.m. The applicant shall return to a CAB II Hearing on May 31st or as soon as possible thereafter, with an improved landscape plan. This landscape plan shall include: 1. Drought tolerant landscaping within a 15 foot radius from the monument sing; 2. Two 15 gallon trees to frame the sign; 3. Several shrubs of which 1/2 shall be of 1 gallon size and the other 1/2 of 5 gallon size; 4. A provision for irrigation. MN/04/CAB19-1748WP5 (5-25-90/2) CASE NUMBER: 89-036V/DR PAGE 1 OF XX 8 8 8 - I1. STANDARD CONDITIONS 1. F. G. H. GENERAL CONDITIONS A. This approval will expire in two years, on May 17, 1992, at 5:00 p.m. unless the conditions have been met or an extension has been approved by the Authorized Agency. This approval may be appealed to the authorized agency wi thin 15 calendar days from the date of this approval. B. C. 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. D. In the event that any of the conditions of this permit are not satisfied, the Planning and 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. E. Upon a showing of compelling public necessity demonstrated at a noticed hearing, the City of Encini tas, acting through the authorized agency, may add, amend, or delete conditions and regulations contained in this permit. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance wi th any sections of the Zoning Development Code and all other applicable City Ordinances in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance unless specifically waived here. The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, Uniform Fire Code, and all other applicable codes and ordinances in effect at the time of building permit issuance unless specifically waived here. Permits from other agencies will be required as follows: Coastal Commission MN/04/CAB19-1748WP5 (5-25-90/2) CASE NUMBER: 89-036V/DR PAGE 2 OF XX 8 8 8 1. Project is approved as submitted/modified as evidenced by the plot plan signed by a City Official as approved by the Old Encinitas Community Advisory Board on May 17, 1990 and shall not be altered without Planning and Community Development Department review and approval. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 2. LANDSCAPING A. All required plantings shall be in place prior to use or occupancy of new buildings or structures. All required plantings shall be maintained in good growing conditions, and whenever necessary, shall be replaced with new plant materials to ensure continued compliance with applicable landscaping, buffering, and screening requirements. All landscaping shall be maintained in a manner that will not depreciate adjacent property values and otherwise adversely affect adjacent properties. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENCINITAS FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 3. FIRE A. Numbers shall be clearly visible from the street fronting the structure. Where structures are located off a roadway on long driveways, a monument shall be placed at the entrance where the driveway intersects the main roadway. Address numbers shall be displayed on this monument. B. Prior to final recordation, the applicant shall submit a letter from the Fire District stating that all development impact, plan check and/ or cost recovery fees have been paid or secured to the satisfaction of the District. MN/04/CAB19-1748WP5 (5-25-90/2) CASE NUMBER: 89-036V/DR PAGE 3 OF XX