The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About75A - 617 E. 17TH ST. REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ~ ~ CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: SEPTEMBER 6, 2005 TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL NO. 2005-03 (VARIANCE NO. 2005-09) TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 50-FOOT TALL FLAGPOLE AT 617 EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET - ST KRIEGER APPLICANT APPROVED o As Recommended o As Amended o Ordinance on 151 Reading o Ordinance on 2nd Reading o Implementing Resolution o Set Public Hearing For CONTINUED TO t CITY(MANAGER FILE NUMBER RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Deny Appeal No. 2005-03. 2. Adopt a resolution denying Variance No. 2005-09. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION On June 13, 2005, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution denying Variance No. 2005-09 by a vote of 6:0 (Leo absent) to allow a 50-foot tall flagpole in the Arterial Commercial (C5) zoning district at 617 East Seventeenth Street (Exhibit A) . DISCUSSION The Planning Commission held a public hearing to review a proposed 50- foot tall flagpole at an existing service station at 617 East Seventeenth Street. This request required approval of a variance for exceeding the 35-foot height limit in the Arterial Commercial (C5) zoning district. The Commission noted that the 35-foot height limit would adequately allow the prominent display of a flag and denied the variance request based on the determination that no overriding circumstances existed that warranted exceeding the height limit and concerns about the flagpole being utilized as an additional marketing tool for the service station. The applicant is appealing the Planning Commission's decision to deny Variance No. 2005-09 (Exhibit B). The applicant contends that because of the site's physical constraints, it requires a 50-foot flagpole to be able to properly display and view a flag from the surrounding areas. Additionally, the applicant feels that the proposed flagpole would not set a precedent for future requests of 50-foot tall flagpoles or have a negative aesthetic impact either to the immediate residential vicinity or the City of Santa Ana. 75A-1 Appeal No. 2005-03 (Variance No. 2005-09) September 6, 2005 Page 2 The site's physical location and the applicant's interest in displaying the American flag was considered by the Planning Commission. The Commission noted that first amendment protections prevent the City from requiring that only an American flag be displayed. Thus the current or subsequent property owners are entitled to display any flag. The Commission further noted that the 35-foot height limit would adequately allow the prominent display of the flag, and felt that the excessive height proposed by the applicant represented an attention-getting device. It is therefore recommended that Appeal No. 2005-03 be denied. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. ~ J Y M Trevino E tive Director Planning & Building Agency PG:rb pg\reports\vaOS-09.cc-appeal 75A-2 REQUEST FOR Planning Commission Action i!W'r1 k~/~: /GAU~auoll 1.."'-"" ..~:. -" ~- PLANNING COMMISSION SECRETARY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: JUNE 13, 2005 TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE NO. 2005-09 FILED BY STEVE KRIEGER TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 50-FOOT TALL FLAGPOLE AT 617 EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET APPROVED D As Recommended D As Amended D Set Public Hearing For DENIED D Applicant's Request D Staff Recommendation CONTINUED TO Prepared by Pedro Guillen ~ ~~~;ector ~~~er RECOMMENDED ACTION Adopt a resolution denying Variance No. 2005-09. DISCUSSION Request of Applicant Mr. Steve Krieger is requesting approval of a variance to allow the construction of a 50-foot tall flagpole at an existing service station at 617 East Seventeenth Street. Property Description The development site is a semi-rectangular shaped lot that is approximately 1.6 acres in size and is located on the northwest corner of Seventeenth Street and Santiago Avenue. The property is located in the Arterial Commercial (C5) zoning district and has a General Plan land use designation of General Commercial (GC). The existing site has a Union 76 Service Station that includes a mini-market, a car wash building and a 35- foot freestanding sign. The surrounding land uses consist of single- family residences immediately to the north, commercial and multi-family residential to the east and the Interstate 5 Freeway (Santa Ana Freeway) to the south and west (Exhibits 1 and 2) . Project Description The proposed project involves the construction of a 50-foot tall flagpole that will display an American flag measuring 10-feet by 15-feet, totaling 150 square feet (Exhibit 3). EXHIBIT A 75A-3 Variance No. 2005-09 June 13, 2005 Page 2 The flagpole is proposed to be located near building, at the end of an existing landscaped modified to accommodate the flagpole (Exhibit 4) . the existing planter that car wash will be Analysis of the Issues In September 2004, the applicant applied for a variance to allow a 100- foot flagpole at an existing service station. After receiving public testimony on the request on October 25, 2004, the Planning Commission denied Variance No. 2004-12. The Planning Commission denied the variance due to the fact that the existing 35-foot height limit would adequately allow the prominent display of an American flag and that the excessive height proposed by the applicant represented an attention-getting device. After filing an appeal of the Planning Commission decision, on January 18, 2005 the City Council denied the appeal due to similar concerns that the Planning Commission had identified. The applicant has submitted a new proposal to construct a 50-foot tall flagpole that will again display the American flag. Because the property is lower in elevation than the Santa Ana Freeway, the applicant wants the 50-foot tall flagpole to be identified with his business and serve as a new landmark for the City of Santa Ana. Staff has identified several concerns with the proposal that have resulted in recommending denial of the variance application. First, the Santa Ana Municipal Code establishes a height limit of 35-feet for structures located in the C5 zone and within 140-feet of any property zoned or used for residential purposes. The proposed flagpole exceeds the height limit by 15-feet and is immediately adjacent to single-family residences. Second, the City's General Plan designates the Santa Ana Freeway and Seventeenth Street as primary and secondary street corridors. One of the goals of the General Plan is to discourage the intrusion of excessive signage or structures that create obstructions to views within and from these corridors, such as this flagpole. Third, approval of this variance would set a precedent for similar types of requests, such as signage, for other businesses located along any freeway in Santa Ana seeking greater visibility. Finally, the existing service station is situated at a prominent business location on Seventeenth Street, directly north of the freeway off-ramp and immediately adjacent to the freeway on-ramp. Due to this high visibility location, there is no need for additional signage or identification of the premises. 75A-4 Variance No. 2005-09 June 13, 2005 Page 3 Staff has considered the immediate surroundings, specifically the freeway and the adjacent residential uses, in reviewing the applicant's request. Staff performed a height survey of the most prominent structures in the surrounding area. The subject property has an existing 35-foot tall freestanding sign that was approved in 1995. The top of the freeway sound wall immediately to the west of the property measures approximately 35- feet above street level. Guaranty Chevrolet, to the east, has a 50-foot tall freestanding sign. The Santa Ana Water Tower, which is designated as a historic landmark, is located on the opposite side of the freeway and measures 130-feet above street level (Exhibits 5 through 7) . Additionally, recently approved flagpoles in the City range in height from 20 feet to 35 feet. It has been determined that a need for such a great disparity in height is not warranted when considering the property's close proximity to the freeway on and off-ramps and prominent location on Seventeenth Street. Additionally, the residential uses to the north would be in direct view of the proposed flagpole and its flag. Based on code requirements and attached findings, no special circumstances warrant relief from the municipal code for constructing a 50-foot tall flagpole and exceeding the maximum allowable height (Exhibit 8). Based on the above analysis, staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny Variance No. 2005-09. CEQA Compliance In accordance with the recommended action is not environmental documentation California considered is required. Environmental Quality Act, a CEQA proj ect . Therefore, the no ~\\~ Pedro Guili'en Assistant Planner I PG:JM pg\reports\va05~09.pc 75A-5 R1 i R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 - R1 c R1C ,,,. ! o 5D-21 Rl R1 o Ml R3 R3 M2 r----> ,.-- A1 -B C-SM C1 . C1-MD C2 C3 C3-A C4 C5 GENERAL AGRICULTURAL PARKING MODIFICATION COMMERCIAL SOUTH MAIN COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL COMM. COMMERCIALJMUSEUM DISTRICT GENERAL COMMERCIAL CENTRAL BUSINESS CENTRAL BUSINESS-ARTIST VILLAGE PLANNED SHOPPING CENTER ARTERIAL COMMERCIAL CR GC M1 M2 MO o P PCD PRO COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL GOVERNMENT CENTER LIGHT INDUSTRIAL HEAVY INDUSTRIAL MILITARY OPERATIONS OPEN SPACE PROFESSIONAL PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT R1 R2 R3 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TWO FAMILY RESIDENCE MULTIPLE DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE SUBURBAN APARTMENTS RESIDENTIAL ESTATE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT SPECIFIC PLAN R4 RE SO SP 1m ~~ VA 05-9 STEVE KRIEGER II 617 EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET A rPY' - = 500 FEET 1" = 1000 FEET P LAN N N G AND BU LD EXHIBIT 1 75A-6 N G AGE N C Y I- l w w ..... II: NINETEENTH ST. ~ <( I- en =2: w tE =2: Lu Lu ::J 9 t::I Z t::I <t) <t) W Lu >- Lu ~ ex: LIJ ~ Lu ex: :::! ~ >- <( >- l.C c( ..... ~ ..... ~ ~ ~ lJ.. W lJ.. lJ.. en Lu COMMERCIAL Z Lu 0 ..... \:l c.. STREET 1S\-1. ~~ 4f 4f-ff. "'1~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~ VA 05-9 STEVE KRIEGER II 617 EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET PLANNING AND BUILDING AGE N C Y EXHIBIT 2 75A-7 COM. A r9(' -- - - I t . II ,I 'I -_. I" IIi I 11~lh ,...1 1.lulll u I , j l , ! .....,\".,."""'.....~ ~ 1 ~. .... .-. , I.. ~ r i ~ .._-,,~~'-", ;".. ; ! . -\ t, 1 j ;-4P-' r:..i- ~- "',tt-- r.:~.-~---: I-! ~ \ ril', , --. .- , t j I ~, , ,-... . i ~_J ~:tf,' 'iT! .... W-_M~) '" /' -i.",~1> 1" ",l' /" 1----'-. ~ I l I I . ,1111 I I .. I ! ! , '\ ", . I I .... T.. j .::> .0 j i ~ ~ 1 [--~...._.,.,."'._.-r-..1 .....--.,~,~,,~,'.--~~-"...._,~~.....----<.._~ -- -I .... .~ .... ~- ,.. '/IIIfI//IIII- -- rr - ...,- -- nM.w 8NfJW ItnIU ..., ww Y.lM'S .JO J.JD I I I I I I I ~- -----' ..... -- [)::(JJ [1:;:,~:J ~I n;;:tii,I"-lril' ,:~[l -, .~Jf-.,....,.f ...' ~ I I ~ I , I i , 'i.l;.,.-,<-,.,.,.,...., . ""'. ~. .,r. C)::J:![! [if:;::i] .".. .'J-- I .~~e-;~~~.i I I i J . I I I I , I i i , ! , ) "'""" ~~, -""""'" Y/4. 05-9 75AillHIBIT 3 __tNU _10 __ ~__! 7" ----,., , I I I li~i~ 75~~i 4 ~ ,.. -,... ~ ~ c.;> o ~ -~ ~,.. ,.. ~ eJ ~ ~ - e~ ,.. ..cOO = ~ 00 ;> = 0 o..c =< ~,.. eJlllllll 0 00 0 ~~ = I eJlllllll I/) ~~ = I = ~ ~ = ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ - =~ = = ~ = ,..< o o = ~,.. I = I/) = ~OO ~ ~ VA 05-9 1SABIf 0 ....... o o ~ I = If') ....... QJ - = e ell >- .- QJrJ'J. ~ ell U .:: ~~ .......= = ~ ~....... .. \I.) ~ QJ = QJ ~~ 75~Jli6 * * 7~\~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .....- ~ ~ ~ I = ~ ~ I . ~ ~ ~ ~ .....- = OeJ< ~.~ ~ . ~.....- ~ = = .....-oo.~ ~~oo. ~~a ~ {I:J 0 =~~ <~{I:J ~ .....- {I:J .....- = 0 = 0 · ~ 00. eJ 00. '-" < I ,-.... ... ~ ~~ .....- ~ . ~ ~ ~ Q... e~ variance 2005-09 June 13, 2005 Page 1 of 2 Findings of Fact A. That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent and purpose of the provisions of this chapter. There are no special circumstances applicable to the subject property where the strict interpretation of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subj ect property of privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent and purpose of the provisions of the zoning code. The existing service station is situated at a prominent business location, directly north of the freeway off-ramp and immediately adj acent to the freeway on-ramp. Addi tionally, Seventeenth Street is a major arterial street and provides a large volume of traffic in this area. In addition, there is an existing 35-foot freestanding pole sign on the southeast portion of the site that provides additional identification to the site. Therefore, there is no need for additional signage or identification symbols on the premises. This is a typical lot with no unique site features that warrant a structure to exceed the maximum allowable height limit within the zone. B. That the granting of a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. The denial of the variance should not significantly impact the right of the property owner to enjoy the use of their property. Seventeenth Street is a major arterial in the City and has a high traffic volume. The construction of a 50-foot tall flagpole will not guarantee any greater enj oyment or business attraction permitted by code. VA 05-..i. 75_us Variance 2005-09 June 13, 2005 Page 2 of 2 C. That the granting of a variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property. The granting of a variance may be detrimental and aesthetically incompatible to the surrounding residential uses, when considering that no other structure is similar in height to the proposed structure and the residential uses located immediately to the north of this site, which are considered a sensitive land use. D. That the granting of a variance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. The Santa Ana Freeway is designated as a primary street corridor and Seventeenth Street is designated as a secondary street corridor and major arterial in the City's General Plan. The General Plan discourages the intrusion of unsightly signage and other similar structures, such as the proposed 50- foot tall flagpole, which impact the visual and aesthetic qualities of these corridors. 75A-14 KO -6/20/05 RESOLUTION NO. 2005-17 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DENYING VARIANCE NO. 2005-09 SEEKING TO ALLOW A 50-FOOT TALL FLAGPOLE AT AN EXISTING SERVICE STATION AT 617 EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. The applicant is requesting approval of Variance No. 2005-09 to allow a 50-foot tall flagpole at an existing service station at 617 East Seventeenth Street. B. Variance No. 2005-09 came before the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana for a duly noticed public hearing on June 13, 2005. C. Applicant is seeking a variance from Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-602(c)(2), which establishes a height limit of 35-feet for structures that are located in the C5 zone and within 140-feet of any property zoned or used for residential purposes. 1. As defined in the municipal code, a structure is "anything constructed or erected which requires permanent location on the ground, or attached to something having permanent location on the ground, including signs and billboards". 2. The flagpole exceeds the maximum allowable height for this zone by 15-feet, and is immediately adjacent to single-family residences. D. Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-638 authorizes the Planning Commission to grant a variance upon making certain findings. The Planning Commission determines that the findings necessary to grant the variance have not been established: 1. That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent and purpose of the provisions of this chapter. i. There are no special circumstances applicable to the subject property where the strict interpretation of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of 75A-15 Resolution No. 2005-17 Page 1 of 4 privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent and purpose of the provisions of the zoning code. ii. The existing service station is situated at a prominent business location, directly north of the freeway off-ramp and immediately adjacent to the freeway on-ramp. Additionally, Seventeenth Street is a major arterial street and provides a large volume of traffic in this area. In addition, there is an existing 35-foot freestanding pole sign on the southeast portion of the site that provides additional identification to the site. Therefore, there is no need for additional signage or identification symbols on the premises. iii. This is a typical lot with no unique site features that warrant a structure to exceed the maximum allowable height limit within the zone. 2. That the granting of a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. The denial of the variance will not significantly impact the right of the property owner to enjoy the use of their property. Seventeenth Street is a major arterial in the City and has a high traffic volume. The construction of a 50-foot tall flagpole will not guarantee any greater enjoyment or business attraction permitted by code. 3. That the granting of a variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property. The granting of a variance will be detrimental and aesthetically incompatible to the surrounding residential uses, when considering that no other structure is similar in height to the proposed structure and the residential uses located immediately to the north of this site, which are considered a sensitive land use. 4. That the granting of a variance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. The Santa Ana Freeway is designated as a primary street corridor and Seventeenth Street is designated as a secondary street corridor and major arterial in the City's General Plan. The General Plan discourages the intrusion of unsightly signage and other similar structures, such as the proposed 50-foot tall flagpole, which impact the visual and aesthetic qualities of these corridors. E. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, this is not a project; no environmental documentation is necessary for this project. 75A-16 Resolution No. 2005-17 Page 2 of 4 Section 2. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana, after conducting the public hearing, hereby denies Variance Permit No. 2005-09. This decision is based upon the evidence submitted at the abovesaid hearing, which includes, but not is not limited to: the Request for Planning Commission Action dated June 13, 2005 and exhibits attached thereto; and the public testimony written and oral, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference ADOPTED this 13th day of June, 2005 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: Cribb, De La Torre, Gartner, Lutz, Mondo, Nalle (6) NOES: Commissioners: None (0) ABSENT: Commissioners: Leo (1) ABSTENTIONS: Commissioners: None (0) Glenn Mondo Chairperson APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher, City Attorney By: Kylee O. Otto Assistant City Attorney 75A-17 Resolution No. 2005-17 Page 3 of 4 CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, MARTHA RAMIREZ, Clerk of the Planning Commission, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2005-17 to be the original resolution adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana on June 13, 2005. Date: Clerk of the Planning Commission City of Santa Ana 75A-18 Resolution No. 2005-17 Page 4 of 4 Planning and Building Agency Planning Division 20 Civic Center Plaza P.O. Box 1988 (M-20) Santa Ana, CA 92702 (714) 647-5804 APPEAL APPLICATION :!:ii:: I. OWNER/APPLICANT ApplicantS~'\7~~ ~\.-\~<;"~{L 1\--, c:.. s Full na':l,e of Person, Firm, or Corporation >.._-1\ \ "? <0<;::) \l) ~ c..,. e'\)c.=..,,-,\~~~~ S'\ R.~~\ (1)'1-)-5 ::::L -QO 03 Mailing AC\?\ess ',). '. Area Code Phone No. Legal Owner Name: '$ ","$'L"''--.(L\~~~(L ~"->\~R_.~~,-\S '=-S .~ '\'J~ - J Legal Owner Address~ \'\ 'C._ S(::.~~~~~~~$iT 1l.E.~"\ , S~~~ ~~~ ,cz.~ ~1.l()\ , Phone No.: n\~ ~~ \~J~2, Fax: ( Location i\ ~~\) II. SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS III. REASON FOR REQUEST In the following provided space, please clearly specify and explain the error(s) of decision or requirement upon which you are basing this appeal. (If additional space is needed, please attach additional comments to the back of this application.) s;:~X- '"'"' ~c....~~D ~~~,~\~ cmlcntr-frm\appeal 5/00 Date:\;- ).0 - ~/ APPEAL APPLICATION NO. fA... PP l- - d DO!? . 3 - A ? c.. EXHIBIT B Applicant's Signature: 75A-19 We do not believe the display of an American flag on our property would aesthetically impact either the local community in the immediate vicinity of the site or the City of Santa Ana. We do not understand how the American flag is considered to be unsightly. The sole purpose of this variance request is to display an American flag that can be properly seen by the local community. The flagpole needs to be 50 feet in height to overcome the physical constraints of the site such as the 35' canopy, freeway sound wall and existing mature trees. We feel the Planning Commission did not take into account the physical constraints associated with our site, which requires us to provide a 50-foot flagpole for the American flag to be appropriately displayed. Our property has physical constraints that occurred after our project was constructed and prevents clear views of the site from the surrounding areas. A 35-foot flagpole, which is the maximum height limit for the site would not allow the American flag to be visible due to these existing physical constraints. The constraints are due largely to the noise walls along the east side of the Santa Ana Freeway. These noise walls are adjacent to and south and west of our property. The noise walls block direct views of our site of motorists traveling northbound on the Santa Ana freeway. Northbound motorists cannot see our site until after they've passed the 17fu Street freeway off-ramp. A 35-foot flagpole would not allow northbound motorists to see the site until after passing the off-ramp exit. A 50-foot flagpole would be visible to northbound freeway motorists before they approach the off-ramp, allowing them time to safely exit the freeway at 17fu Street. We do not feel the approval of this variance request would set a precedent for additional 50-foot flagpoles throughout Santa Ana because other sites do not have the physical constraints that impact our property. Our site has physical constraints and in conjunction with the 35-foot height restriction severely limits site visibility that can only be solved with a 50-foot flagpole. 75A-20 KO -8/23/05 RESOLUTION NO. 2005-079 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DENYING VARIANCE NO. 2005-09 (APPEAL NO. 2005-03) SEEKING TO ALLOW A 50-FOOT TALL FLAGPOLE AT AN EXISTING SERVICE STATION AT 617 EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. The applicant is requesting approval of Variance No. 2005-09 to allow a 50-foot tall flagpole at an existing service station at 617 East Seventeenth Street. B. On June 13, 2005, Variance No. 2005-09 came before the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana for a duly noticed public hearing. The Planning Commission denied Variance No. 2005-09 by a vote of 6:0 (Leo absent). C. On June 20, 2005, the applicant appealed the Planning Commission decision, Appeal No. 2005-03. D. Applicant is seeking a variance from Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-602(c)(2), which establishes a height limit of 35-feet for structures that are located in the C5 zone and within 140-feet of any property zoned or used for residential purposes. 1. As defined in the municipal code, a structure is "anything constructed or erected which requires permanent location on the ground, or attached to something having permanent location on the ground, including signs and billboards". 2. The flagpole exceeds the maximum allowable height for this zone by 15-feet, and is immediately adjacent to single-family residences. E. Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-638 authorizes the City Council to grant a variance upon making certain findings. The City Council determines that the findings necessary to grant the variance have not been established: 1. That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent and purpose of the provisions of this chapter. Resolution No. 2005-079 Page 1 of 4 75A-21 i. There are no special circumstances applicable to the subject property where the strict interpretation of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent and purpose of the provisions of the zoning code. ii. The existing service station is situated at a prominent business location, directly north of the freeway off-ramp and immediately adjacent to the freeway on-ramp. Additionally, Seventeenth Street is a major arterial street and provides a large volume of traffic in this area. In addition, there is an existing 35-foot freestanding pole sign on the southeast portion of the site that provides additional identification to the site. Therefore, there is no need for additional signage or identification symbols on the premises. iii. This is a typical lot with no unique site features that warrant a structure to exceed the maximum allowable height limit within the zone. 2. That the granting of a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. The denial of the variance will not significantly impact the right of the property owner to enjoy the use of their property. Seventeenth Street is a major arterial in the City and has a high traffic volume. The construction of a 50-foot tall flagpole will not guarantee any greater enjoyment or business attraction permitted by code. 3. That the granting of a variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property. The granting of a variance will be detrimental and aesthetically incompatible to the surrounding residential uses, when considering that no other structure is similar in height to the proposed structure and the residential uses located immediately to the north of this site, which are considered a sensitive land use. 4. That the granting of a variance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City. The Santa Ana Freeway is designated as a primary street corridor and Seventeenth Street is designated as a secondary street corridor and major arterial in the City's General Plan. The General Plan discourages the intrusion of unsightly signage and other similar structures, such as the proposed 50-foot tall flagpole, which impact the visual and aesthetic qualities of these corridors. Resolution No. 2005-079 Page 2 of 4 75A-22 F. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, this is not a project; no environmental documentation is necessary for this project. Section 2. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana, after conducting the public hearing, hereby denies Variance No. 2005-09 (Appeal No. 2005-03). This decision is based upon the evidence submitted at the abovesaid hearing, which includes, but not is not limited to: the Request for City Council Action dated September 6, 2005 and exhibits attached thereto; and the public testimony written and oral, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference Section 3. This decision rendered by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana is final and is subject to judicial review pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.6. The Clerk of the Council shall give direct notice to the applicant of the Council's decision and these findings. ADOPTED this day of September, 2005 Miguel A. Pulido Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher, City Attorney By: Kylee O. Otto Assistant City Attorney AYES: Council members NOES: Councilmembers ABSTAIN: Councilmembers NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, PATRICIA E. HEALY, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2005-079 to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on Date: Clerk of the Council City of Santa Ana Resolution No. 2005-079 Page 3 of 4 75A-23 75A-24