Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-034 - Denying Variance No. 00-01137 RESOLUTION NO. 2000-034 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DENYING VARIANCE NO. 00-01, FOR RELIEF FROM CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE SIGN CODE FOR THE HOME DEPOT PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1750 EAST EDINGER AVENUE WHEREAS, Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-638 provides for the granting of a variance from the provisions of the Santa Aha Municipal Code, upon making certain findings; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 13, 2000, on Variance Application No. 00-01, for relief from certain provisions of the sign code and denied said Variance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: 1. Based upon the evidence submitted at the abovesaid headng this Council finds and determines as follows: That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, that the strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges not otherwise at vadance with the intent and purpose of the provisions of this chapter. The subject property is 16.6 acres which is substantially larger than the majority of commercial centers constructed in the City. The development pattern of the site includes a five foot landscaped parkway, a five foot public sidewalk and a 12 foot landscaped setback with a screen wall at the top of a six foot berm. The physical constraints created by the berm and wall reduces visibility into the commercial center and therefore a larger pylon sign along the primary street frontage is justified. The strict application of the sign code with regard to the size and height of the pylon sign is inappropriate given the topography of the site created by the landscaped berm. A four foot landscape planter will be provided around all sides of freestanding signs in accordance with City sign code requirements except where it is physically impossible to meet this City requirement due to the size and configuration of the approved landscape setback. Not allowing an increase in the size of the pylon sign and secondary signage for the center would deprive the subject property of privileges that the City has provided other commercial centers of a similar size and nature, Resolution No. 2000-034 Page 1 of 3 138 There does not, however, appear to be grounds to justify the enlargement of the pdmary building sign given the increase in the size of the pylon sign adjacent to the projects street frontage and the extra secondary signage proposed on the primary building elevation. Approval of a variance for the increase in the length and size of primary building signage would be inconsistent with the privileges afforded other commercial centers of a similar size and nature. Applying the City's sign code will balance or center the primary building sign within the allowable signable area and reduce sign clutter on the pdmary elevation. That the granting of a vadance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. This Council finds that the corporate signage proposed by the applicant may lead to the gross proliferation of signage on the building and around the site which is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of any substantial property rights and would be inconsistent with the privileges afforded other commemial centers of a similar size and nature. That the granting of a variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property. The project may be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property as proposed. The City sign code and the sign variances being sought are consistent w'~ signage requirements of a commercial center of this size and scale. However, the applicant has testified that the signage sought is the standard corporate signage for the Home Depot. This Council finds that similar corporate signage for this applicant has resulted in the gross proliferation of additional signage on and around the front of the building site. Signage on the building or the site in excess of that approved by vadance and that allowed by City code would be materially detrimental to the public welfare and have a deleterious effect to surrounding property. The proliferation of signage leads to sign clutter and creates a visual blight of an unkempt building and site appearance. That the granting of a vadance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. The granting of variances will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. The retail Center was approved in conformance with City zoning, development and General Plan requirements. Signage is ancillary to the project previously approved and a necessary component of a commercial center. Resolution No. 2000-034 Page2 of 3 139 2. Vadance No. 00-01 is hereby denied, based upon the aforementioned findings. ADOPTED this 1_..~ day of May, 2000. A'I-I'EST: Patricia E. Healy Clerk of the Council COUNCILMEMBERS: Pulido .Aye Lutz Ave Bist Aye Christy Aye Franklin Aye McGuigan Nay Moreno Nay APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher, City Attomey CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY State of California County of Orange City of Santa Ana I, PATRICIA E. HEALY, Clerk of the Council, do hereby certify the attached Resolution No. 2000-034 to be the odginal ordinance adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on May 1, 2000. Clerk of the Council City of Santa Aha Resolution No. 2000-034 Page 3 of 3