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