HomeMy WebLinkAboutPH 3 VARIANCE 91-02 05-20-91I
PUBLIC HEARING N0. 3
5-20-91
DATE:MAY 20, 1991 I n t e r- C O M
TO: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER
FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT.' APPEAL OF VARIANCE 91-02 (ELDORADO BANK)
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council uphold Planning Commission
Resolution No. 2893 of Variance 91-02 by adopting Resolution No.
91-71 as submitted or revised.
BACKGROUND
On April 8, 1991, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.
2893 (Attachment A), approving portions of Variance 91-02, to allow
a monument sign to encroach 10 z feet into the required 15 -foot
building line setback subject to conditions; and denying the
request to allow supplemental text on a business identification
sign, and to place a 25 -square -foot wall sign on a building fascia
at 17752 East Seventeenth Street. The applicant has appealed the
decision to deny portions of Variance 91-02, and is requesting
approval of the request to allow supplemental text on the business
identification sign and to place a 25 -square -foot wall sign on a
building fascia.
The subject site is located at the southwest corner of Seventeenth
Street and Prospect Avenue. Surrounding uses are commercial and
professional with residential uses on the north side of Seventeenth
Street.
A hearing notice identifying the
public hearing for the proposal
Property owners within 300 feet
of the hearing and notices were
the Police Department. The
availability of the agenda and
meeting agenda.
DISCUSSION
time, date and location of the
was published in the Tustin News.
of the site were notified by mail
posted on site, at City Hall and
applicant was informed of the
staff report for this item and
The applicant has requested a Variance from Section 9493 of the
Tustin City Code to allow supplemental text stating "Open
-- City Council Report
Variance 91-02
May 20, 1991
Page 2
Saturdays" on a business identification sign and to allow a wall
sign to exceed the maximum height requirement and be placed on the
building fascia above the roof-eave line.
The applicant currently has a monument sign with supplemental text
reading, "Open Saturdays" beneath the business identification.
This existing monument sign was approved prior to the adoption of
the current Sign Code in 1976. The applicant does not currently
have a wall sign on the east side of the building where the
proposed wall sign would be placed on the fascia, should this
variance be approved.
The Tustin City Zoning Code and California State law require that
certain positive f indings be made in order to grant a variance from
code regulations. The Planning Commission was unable to make those
findings which are discussed below. The Planning Commission staff
report is attached as Attachment C.
1. Granting the variance will not permit special privileges to
the property owner that are inconsistent with the limitations
upon other properties in the district.
Supplemental text:
Granting a variance to allow the applicant to place
supplemental text on a business identification sign would
grant a privilege to the property owner which is inconsistent
with the limitations upon property owners in the commercial
district. No other property owner in the district has been
allowed supplemental text on a business identification sign.
Wall sign:
Granting a variance to allow a wall sign above the building
roof eave line will allow special privileges to the applicant
that are not enjoyed by surrounding businesses. Structures to
the south of the subject site have similar architecture with
overhanging eaves such as the eave on which the applicant
proposes to construct the subject wall sign. Businesses
within these structures have placed their wall signs below
this eave line. The elevation of the building, upon which the
applicant proposes to place the subject wall sign, has a
large, vacant wall visible to the street which could
accommodate the proposed sign.
The business directly to the west of the subject site
currently has a non -conforming wall sign placed on the fascia
City Council Report
Variance 91-02
May 20, 1991
Page 3
of the building. This sign was permitted and constructed in
1974, previous to the current maximum height requirement.
Should this business propose a new wall sign to replace the
existing non -conforming sign, it would be required to meet
current Sign Code standards.
2. That, because of special circumstances applicable to subject
Property, including size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings, the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance
Would deprive the property owner of privileges enjoyed by
other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning
classifications.
Supplemental_ text:
There are no special circumstances applicable to the subject
property that strict application of the code relating to
supplemental text would deprive the property owner of
privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity.
Commercial businesses are allowed by code to use 250 of the
window area for signage. Supplemental text is allowed to be
included in window signage.
Wall sign:
The strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would not
deprive the property owner of privileges enjoyed by other
owners in the Planned Community Commercial District. Tustin
City Code Section 9493(c) allows the property owner to erect
one single -face wall sign on one side wall facing street or
parking lot a maximum size of 5 percent of the side wall area,
not to exceed 25 -square feet. Physical characteristics of the
building provide for visible area below the roof eave to place
a sign on the side wall in question.
3. Granting the Variance will not have a detrimental impact on
surrounding properties.
Supplemental text:
The intention of the Sign Code is to establish guidelines and
standards for the purpose of determining the character of
signs and sign structures that are authorized and desired
within the City of Tustin. The Sign Code excludes
supplemental text from the allowed signs in the Commercial
District to limit the amount of visual clutter caused by
signage in commercial areas. Supplemental text on the
City Council Report
Variance 91-02
May 20, 1991
Page 4
business identification sign would cause undesirable clutter
that could be detrimental to the surrounding properties.
Wall sign:
Granting a variance to allow the applicant to place a wall
sign on the eave would detract from the character of the
building and center in which it is located. The fascia is not
a desirable location for a sign according to the standards of
the current Sign Code, and no surrounding properties have been
allowed to place wall signs at this location on their building
since the current Sign Code was adopted in 1976.
CONCLUSION
Based on the above analysis and review of field conditions in the
vicinity of and on the site, the Planning Commission has
determined: -
That there are no special conditions which support the
approval of a variance to allow a wall sign to be placed on an
eave.
2. There are no special conditions which support the approval of
a variance to allow supplemental text on the sign in the
commercial district.
Therefore, it is recommended that the City Council uphold the
decision of the Planning Commission to deny the supplemental text
and wall sign location, subject to the Conditions of Resolution No.
91-71 as submitted or revised.
Becky Sto e
Assistant Planner
Resolution No. 91-71
Attachment A - Planning
Attachment B - Applicant
Attachment C - Planning
Christine A. Shing on
Assistant City Manager
Community Development Department
Commission Resolution No..2893
Letter of Appeal
Commission Staff Report
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 91-71
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, VARIANCE 91-02, UPHOLDING THE
DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO DENY THE
REQUEST TO ALLOW SUPPLEMENTAL TEXT ON A BUSINESS
IDENTIFICATION SIGN, AND TO PLACE A 25 -SQUARE -FOOT
WALL SIGN ON A BUILDING FASCIA AT 17752 E.
SEVENTEENTH STREET.
The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as
follows:
I. The City Council finds and determines as follows:
A. That a proper appeal of Variance 91-02 has been
filed on behalf of Eldorado Bank to allow
supplemental text on a business identification sign
at 17752 E. Seventeenth Street and to place a new
25 -square -foot wall sign to be placed on a building
fascia above the roof eave line.
B. That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and
held for said application on May 20, 1991.
C. That the City Council has reviewed the request to
allow supplemental text to be placed on a business
identification sign and a wall sign on a building
fascia, and has made the following findings:
1. That granting the Variance will permit special
privileges to the property owner that are
inconsistent with the limitations upon other
property owners in the district. Approving
this request would convey a special privilege
to the property owner which is not enjoyed by
other property owners in the vicinity. No
property owners have been allowed to use
supplemental text on business identification
signs, or place wall signs above the roof eave
under the current Sign Code.
2. That there are no unusual or exceptional
circumstances applicable to the . property
including size, shape, topography and
locations or surroundings that the strict
application of the Zoning Ordinance would
deprive the property owner of privileges
enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity
and under identical classifications. Denial
of said request would not deprive the property
owner of privileges enjoyed by other property
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
181
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Resolution No. 91-71
Page 2
owners in that no commercial property owners
are allowed to place supplemental text on
business identification signs. Physical
characteristics of the building provide for
visible area below the roof eave to place a
wall sign.
3. Granting the Variance will have a detrimental
impact on surrounding properties.
Supplemental text may interrupt the uniform
appearance of the business identification
signs on the street and encourage sign clutter
on Seventeenth Street. Placement of a sign on
the fascia would detract from the character of
the building and center on which it is
located. A fascia is not a desirable location
for a sign according to the Sign Code.
D. This project is Categorically Exempt from the
requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act, pursuant to Section 15311 (Class 11).1
II. The City Council hereby upholds the decision of the
Planning Commission to 'deny the request of Variance 91-
02 to allow supplemental text on the business
identification sign and the location of the wall sign.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular City Council meeting on the
20th day of May, 1991.
MARY WYNN
City Clerk
CHARLES E. PUCKETT
Mayor
9
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Resolution No. 91-71
Page 3
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE )
CITY OF TUSTIN )
CERTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION NO. 91-71
MARY E. WYNN, City Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of the City
Council of the City of Tustin, California, does hereby certify
that the whole number of the members of the City Council of
the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing
Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted at a
regular meeting of the City Council held on the 20th day of
May, 1991, by the following vote:
COUNCILPERSONS AYES:
COUNCILPERSONS NOES:
COUNCILPERSONS ABSTAINED:
COUNCILPERSONS ABSENT:
MARY E. WYNN, City Clerk
1 RESOLUTION NO. 2893
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
3 OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PORTIONS OF
VARIANCE 91-02, TO ALLOW THE MONUMENT SIGN TO
4 ENCROACH 102 FEET INTO THE REQUIRED 15 -FOOT
BUILDING LINE SETBACK SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS; AND TO
r DENY THE REQUEST TO ALLOW SUPPLEMENTAL TEXT ON THE
MONUMENT SIGN, AND TO PLACE A 25 -SQUARE -FOOT WALL
G SIGN ON A BUILDING FASCIA AT ! 17752 E. SEVENTEENTH
STREET.
8 The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin does hereby
0 resolve as follows:
10
I. The Planning Commission finds and determines as follows:
•
A. That a proper application Variance 91-02 has been
11 filed on behalf of Eldorado Bank to allow a new 25-
square -foot wall sign to be placed on a building
12 fascia above the roof eave line; to allow a
monument sign with supplemental text to encroach
13 102 feet into the required 15 -foot building line
14 setback at 17752 E. Seventeenth Street.
B. That a public -hearing was duly called, noticed and
15 held for said application on April 8, 1991.
16 C. That the Planning Commission has reviewed the
17
request to allow a wall sign on a building fascia,
a monumentsign with supplemental text to encroach
18 102 feet into the required 15 -foot building line
setback and has made the following findings:
19 1. Approving the location portions of the
20 monument sign would not convey a special
privilege to the property owner which is not
21 enjoyed by other property owners in the
I vicinity. Other businesses along Seventeenth
22 Street have been allowed monument signs within
the setback area; however, no.property owners
23 have been allowed to exceed the maximum size
for monument signs, use supplemental text on
24 signs, or place wall signs above the roof
eave.
25 .2. That because of special circumstan
applicable to subject ces
26 property, including
size, shape, topography, location or
27 surroundings, the strict application of
portions of the Zoning Ordinance would deprive
28 the property owner of privileges enjoyed by
I .
Attachment A
1
2
V
3'I
4
5
G
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
li
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Resolution No. 2893
Page 2
other properties in the vicinity and under
identical zoning classifications. Should the
monument sign be required to be placed behind
the required 15 -foot minimum building line
setback, its visibility would be reduced in
comparison to other monument signs in the
district. However, the property owner would
not be deprived of privileges enjoyed by other
property owners by conforming to the Code's
requirements for supplemental text, and
placement of wall signs under eaves.
3. To allow the location of the monument sign
would not be detrimental to adjacent and
surrounding properties. Properties in the
same district have monument signs placed
perpendicular to Seventeenth Street within the
required 15 -foot building -line setback.
However, placing a monument sign with
supplemental text may interrupt the uniform
appearance of the monument signs on the street
and, encourage sign clutter on Seventeenth
Street.
4. This project is Categorically Exempt from the
requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act, pursuant to Section 15311 (Class
11) .
II. The Planning Commission hereby approves portions of
Variance 91-02 to allow a monument sign to encroach 102
feet into the required 15 -foot building line and denies
the supplemental text of the monument sign and the
location of the wall sign; subject to the conditions
contained in Exhibit A and attached hereto.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular Planning Commission meeting on
the 8th day of April, 1991.
KATHLEEN'CLANCY
Secretary
DiALD LE J' EU9t
Chairman
1
V
3
4
5
G
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
li
18
1�
20
21
22
23
24
2�
2(
2i
2E
Resolution No. 2893
Page 3
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE )
CITY OF TUSTIN )
I, KATHLEEN CLANCY, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am
the Recording Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City
of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 2893 was duly
passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning
Commission, held on the 8th day of April, 1991.
�Ow-e4.�
KATHLEEN CLANCY
C51 -
Recording Secretary
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NO. 2893
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
VARIANCE 91-02
GENERAL.
1.1
1.1 The design. of the .sign. shall be'modified so that the' sign
(1) box is mounted directly on a planter or pedestal base, to
meet the zoning code definition of a.monument.sign. The
words."Open Saturdays" shall be removed. from the copy.
The building -mounted sign shall be located below the roof
eve.
In all other aspects, the proposed project shall
substantially conform to submitted plans date stamped
April 8, 1991 on f ile with the Community Development
Department as herein modified or as modified by the
Director of Community Development.
In accordance with this Exhibit, the Director of
Community Development may also approve subsequent minor
modifications to plans during plan check if such
modifications are determined consistent with the approved
plans.
(1) 1.2 Unless otherwise specified, all conditions in this
• exhibit shall be complied with prior to issuance of any
building permits for the project, subject to review and
approval by the Community Development Department.
(1) 1.3 Variance approval shall become null and void unless sign
permits and all construction is completed within twelve
(12) months of the date of this exhibit.
(1)* 1.4 Approval of Variance 91-02 is contingent upon the
applicant signing and returning an "Agreement to
Conditions Imposed" form as established by the Director
of Community Development.
------------------------------------------------------------
SOURCE CODES
(1) STANDARD CONDITION (5) RESPONSIBLE
(2) CEQA MITIGATION (6) LANDSCAPING
(3) UNIFORM BUILDING CODE/S (7) PC/CC POLICY
(4) DESIGN REVIEW
*** EXCEPTION
AGENCY REQUIREMENT
GUIDELINES
Exhibit A
Resolution'No. 2893
April 8, 1991
Page 2, -
PLAN SUBMITTAL
(1) 2.1 At building -plan check and prior to issuance of sign
(4) permits, the following shall be submitted:*
a. The applicant shall provide two copies of plans
including site plan, fully dimensioned and detailed
elevations,. attachment methods and electrical
details for approval of the Building Official. All
electrical components shall be U.L. listed.
FUTURE REMOVAL/RELOCATION
*** 3.1 The applicant/property owner shall assume all costs of
removing or relocating the monument sign on Seventeenth
Street at such time that the City of Tustin deems
necessary to widen Seventeenth Street should it be
required for the public health and safety.
April 9, 1991.
City of Tustin
300 Centennial way
Tustin, CA 92680
Attn: Becky Stone
Dear Becky:
As a result of the outcome of the Planning Commission on Monday
April. 8, 1991, I am requesting that the matter of our signage be
considered by the Tustin City Council..
Please contact me to instruct me as to what steps are necessary to
accomplish this request.
Thank you for your- assistance.
Sincerely,
ELDORADO BANK
Catherine M. Niemann
Vice President/Operations Manager
CMN: df
TUS1 IN OFFI(J� 177 I.. (7th 5frovt
Attachment B
I ustirl. Cee if nrnia ` 2680 (714) 8.12-4204
Report to. the
Planning Com
mission
ITEM #5
DATE.:
APRIL 8, 1991
SUBJECT:
VARIANCE 91-02
APPLICANT:
QUALITY PROJECT COORDINATING
P.O. BOX 2653
COSTA MESA, CA 92628-2653
OWNER:
ELDORADO BANK
17752 EAST SEVENTEENTH STREET
TUSTIN, CA 92680
LOCATION:
17752 EAST'SEVENTEENTH STREET
ZONING:
PLANNED COMMUNITY-COMMERCIAL.(PC-C)
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS:
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 11),
SECTION 15311
REQUEST:
1. TO ALLOW A WALL SIGN TO
BE PLACED ON A
BUILDING FASCIA;
2. TO ALLOW A MONUMENT SIGN
WITH SUPPLEMENTAL
TEXT;
3. TO ALLOW A 30 -SQUARE FOOT
MONUMENT SIGN TO
ENCROACH 102 FEET INTO -THE
REQUIRED 15 -FOOT
BUILDING LINE SETBACK.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve portions and
deny portions of Variance 91-02 by adopting Resolution No. 2893, as
submitted or revised.
BACKGROUND
The applicant requests a variance from three sections of the Tustin
City Code to allow:
1. A new 25 -square foot wall sign to be placed on a building
fascia above the roof eave line;
2. Supplemental text on a monument sign;
3. A 30 -square -foot monument sign to encroach 102 feet into the
required 15 -foot building line setback.
Attachment C
Community Development Department
Planning Commission Report
Variance 91-02
April 8, 1991
Page 2
The proposed monument sign" would *,repla'ce an existing, non-
conforming 30 -square foot monument sign.; 'which presently, includes
supplemental text and encroaches 10;2-2 *feet into -the - required 15 -foot
building line setback.
The property is located at the southwest corner of..S'eventeenth
Street and Prospect Avenue. Adjacent properties to the. south and
west are developed with commercial and office buildings, properties
across Seventeenth Street to the north have residential and
professional uses; and properties to the east, across Prospect
Avenue, have commercial and office uses.
A public hearing notice identifying the time, date and location of
the public hearing on this project was published in the Tustin
News. Property owners within .300 feet of the site were notified of
the hearing by mail. Notices were also posted on the property, and
at City Hall and the Police Department. The applicant was informed
of the availability of the staff report for this item and meeting
agenda.
DISCUSSION
The submitted plans propose a twenty-five (25) square foot wall
sign to be placed on the fascia of'the side elevation of the
building, above the roof eave line. Tustin City Code Section
9493(c) allows one (1) wall sign for side -elevations that is a
maximum of 5 percent of the side wall area not to exceed 25 -square
feet per single face of the building to be placed below roof eave
line. The applicant's request is to deviate from the last
requirement of this Section,- by placing the wall sign above the
roof eave line.
The applicant proposes to replace an existing monument sign that
has been located in the same place since the 19701s. Plans call
for a three-foot, nine-inch(3'-911) high by eight -foot 8')
wide by
one and one -half -foot (11-611)
) deep internally illuminated texture -
coated cabinet painted off-white. Copy will consist of bronze -
colored letters raised one-half inch ( k") above the sign's surface,
providing business identification. Additional supplemental text
stating "Open Saturdays" is proposed to be placed under the name in
dark brown letters. Rough wood trim will edge the top and bottom
of the sign. The proposed sign drawings also indicate that the
sign will be elevated on two (2) 1'-4" texture -coated sheet metal
bases painted white. According to Tustin City Code Section 9430,
the proposed sign would technically be a pole sign rather than a
monument sign because it is supported by structural members with
Community
Development Department
Planning Commission Report
Variance 91-02
April 8,,'1991
Page 3
air space between the, grade, level and the sign face. Although pole
signs are allowed in the commercial district subject to,the terms
of a. Conditional Use Permit, the applicant has agreed to modify the
design so that the sign is mounted directly on a pedestal base or
planter, in order to meet the code definition of a monument sign.
The City's Sign Code makes no provisions for supplemental text such
as "Open Saturdays" on monument signs in the commercial districts.
Although the words "Open Saturdays" is printed on the existing sign
in the subject location, this request, to include supplemental text
on the proposed monument sign, will require a variance from Section
9493. However, the applicant is allowed to place supplemental text
on a temporary window sign, not to exceed an aggregate of 25
percent of the total window area.
Tustin City Code Section 9271(u) requires that buildings fronting
secondary or primary highways be set back a minimum of 15 feet from
the ultimate right-of-way line. The purpose of this standard is to
guarantee an aesthetically pleasing streetscape by prohibiting
buildings or structures from being built too close to the existing
right-of-way. Since Seventeenth Street is a major arterial, the
15 -foot required building -line setback applies. The proposed
monument sign, will encroach a maximum of 102 feet into the
required 15 -foot setback. This request will require a variance
from Section 9271(u). However, the proposed revisions to the
Tustin Sign Code, which are currently being developed dated January
1991, would allow this proposed monument sign to encroach into the
15 -foot required building -line setback with no discretionary
approval required.
Although the street has not been widened to its ultimate right-of-
way of 120 feet and has only been widened to 51 feet, on the south
side, the proposed monument sign will not interfere with the right-
of-way, since it is 42 feet behind the right-of-way line.
The Tustin Zoning Code and California State law require that the
Planning Commission make the following findings in order to grant
a variance from code regulations. Following is staff's analysis
considering those findings. The applicant's justification is
attached as Exhibit B.
1. Granting the variance will not permit special privileges to
the property owner that are inconsistent with the limitations
upon other properties in the district.
Wall sign:
Community Development DRepartment
Planning Commission Report
Variance 91-02
April 8,'1991
Page 4
Granting of this ' variance ..will allow special privileges to the
applicant that are not enjoyed'by'surrounding businesses.
Many of the buildings in the vicinity, such; -as the.structure
to the south that houses Eldorado Bank -Escrow,,- Leslie
Associates Insurance Brokers and Financial .-P.lanning
Investments, have similar architecture with, overhanging eaves
such as the eaves on which the applicant proposes to erect
this wall sign. Each of these businesses have signs mounted
below the roof eave line as required by Code. None of these
businesses have been granted variances to mount wall signs
above the eave line.
Monument sign:
Several properties on Seventeenth Street have business
identification monument signs that encroach within the 15 -foot
setback from the ultimate right-of-way line. Some examples of
businesses that have been granted variances from the 15 -foot
required minimum building line are El Torito, ReMax and Mimi's
Place. However, granting a variance to allow the sign to have
supplemental text would grant a privilege to the property
owner which is inconsistent with the limitations upon other
property owners in the district. No other property owners in
the district been granted a variance for supplemental text.
2. That, because of special circumstances applicable to subject
Property, including size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings, the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance
would deprive the property owner of privileges enjoyed by
other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning
classifications.
Wall sign:
The strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would not
deprive the property owner of privileges enjoyed by other
owners in the Planned Community Commercial District. Tustin
City Code Section 9493(c) allows the property owner to erect
one wall sign for side elevations per building 5 percent of
the side wall area, not to exceed 25 -square feet. Physical
characteristics of the building provide for visible area below
the roof eave to place a sign.
Monument sign:
Because the 15 -foot -minimum building -line setback required by
Section 9271(u) of the Tustin City Code would require the
Community
Development Department
Planning Commission Report
Variance 91-02
April 8, 1991
Page 5
proposed monument sign. -.to* be'..placed at least 15 feet behind
the right-of-way line, the strict -'application of. the Code
would deprive the property owner. of privileges enjoyed by
other properties; since other propertyowners have been
granted a. variance to encroach into the 15 -foot -minimum
building -line setback. There are no special circumstances
applicable to the subject property that strict- application of
the Code relating to supplemental text would deprive the
property owner of privileges enjoyed by other properties in
the vicinity.
3. Granting the Variance will not have a detrimental impact on
surrounding properties.
Wall sign:
Granting a variance to allow the applicant to place a wall
sign on the eave would detract from the character of the
building and center in which it is located. Placement of a
sign on the fascia is not a logical location for a sign, and
no surrounding properties have been allowed to place wall
signs at this location on their building.
Monument sign:
Granting this variance will have no detrimental impact on
surrounding properties. A monument sign has existed in this
location since the 19701s, and the proposed sign will resemble
the existing sign related to location.- Other'business signs
are located perpendicularly within the 15 -foot setback. A 32 -
square -foot double-faced monument sign placed perpendicular to
the street will provide a uniform street appearance and
consistency with the Sign Code size requirements. However,
supplemental text would interrupt this uniform appearance and
encourage sign clutter on Seventeenth Street.
CONCLUSION
Based on the above analysis and review of conditions in the
vicinity of and on the site, staff has determined:
1. That there are no special conditions which support the
approval of a variance to allow a wall sign to be placed on an
eave.
2.
There are no special conditions which support the approval of
Community
Development Department
Planning Commission Report
Variance 91-02
April 8, 1991
Page 6
a variance to allow, supplemental text on the sign in the
commercial district.
3. There are special circumstances which support a variance of
Sections 9271(u) of the Tustin City Code to allow a monument
sign to encroach 10k feet into the required* 15 -foot' building -
line setback on Seventeenth Street.
Therefore, it is recommended that the Planning Commission approve
the location of the monument sign and deny the supplemental text
and wall sign location, subject to the Conditions of Resolution No.
2893 as submitted or revised.
Becky Stone Christine A. Shingle on
Assistant Planner Director of Communi y Development
Attachment: Resolution No. 2893
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Community Development Department
OJ
C�
C,
mi
u' d
IL 3 a r
Li
NQ
I d JFlo
. .i.
H ..
•
TNa rs AN onarNAf UWMI"*DR*W G CRUM jOb rine Fe�ecr�c�
By CONnN[NTAL SW..Nz n r#KWNWTUO roe rix 'salesperson "rr►�
�� �+ MesoNALUSE rNCOfMKTX)WwrTN•wrronC Sv"Q address I�TSZ 1�� �- �><T•-
�7 KAW4DroiN[N
rouarcoNn[Ar'SMfM nKNoiio ~r-
ff4'l' ANTANlfAtCIYKLE - D'�s"°`"r!To'A►�roi+rou►sioerrooifoidrNfi�r6N ; City
MOR K� IT TO' �[' US[O•• R�►ROOZ1tED; CO/I�P CIlf EX• TT-"
STA`IJT�N; 6ATIf 90690 WSiTEOI/rANY F4Wl6N approved
~ 'Sc>ZC
H � I
4
1 i
L -LFL
SEs
�i
—T a
-5 f .
;T >;
o
�T�31h
r _
i M
7S4'1-S/iIVTAlRITAt
STANTON; CLE - D
C�AUF. 90690
TNIS n AN OEYDINAI UNn►Eulsl/eoo�AMIINO CfEAfto
BY CONTINENTAL SIGNS. IT IS SUWIMD Nof VoUf
FIWSONAI USE M CONNKTgN WIMA ►tomcf al"40-
IGNNED fOt YOU EtY CONTINETRACSIGNS: TT K NOT TO'
�f1O�NT°�ANY°fllo<^E`roulroidANakrioNj
NOEfISTri TOYxETusiFOElliiidoilCio: Cd geolfoc.
NuIT[dIPPANr FktwION:
I addfQ53- I res i
�Y I�
approved
ELDORADO bANK
Iwl
February 6,. 1991
City of Tustin
Planning Commission
300 Centennial Way
Tustin,' CA 92680
Re: Sign Variance Request
17752 E. Seventeenth Street
To Whom It May Concern:
Eldorado Bank is seeking to upgrade and update the sign on the
property located at 17752 E. Seventeenth Street. The building was
completely remodeled during 1990, and, as such, we would like to
have signs more in keeping with the Bank's -fresh new look.
We are requesting certain variances from the City of Tustin codes
in order to install our new monument sign. In this regard, please
consider the following matters:
The granting of such variance will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the
property or improvements in such area or vicinity in
which the property is located.
We are requesting a variance to the code for the location
of the sign. We simply want to replace our eighteen -year
old sign with a new sign, in the same,.exact location.
Since our old sign has not posed any problem in the last
eighteen years, we believe that it.would -not now
represent any type of detriment or hazard.
2. Such a variance is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by
other property owners in the same vicinity as the bank.
Please note that California Federal Savings, with whom
we share a parking lot, has a newer sign located in the
same area that we are requesting. In addition, several
businesses along Seventeenth Street, near the bank, have
signs located in similar locations.
If we locate our sign at the location dictated by the
code, the sign would not be visible from Seventeenth
TUSTIN OFFICE 17752 E. 17th Street Tustin, California 92680 (714)832-4204
MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 838, 17752 East 17th Street, Tustin, CA 92680 EXHIBIT B
ELDORADO BANK
Variance Application
February 6, 1991
Page -2-
Street. While we do have signs on the building itself,
we feel that, by not clearly identifying - the. bank from
Seventeenth Street, our business would be *affected
negatively.
3. The monument sign that we are requesting is substantially
more. attractive and in keeping with the overall image
that is projected in the area. We feel that the area
wil
1 be improved and enhanced by our new sign.
4. The granting of such variance will not adversely affect
the Comprehensive General Plan.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
?ce
L. anssen
Presidentmer Operations and Service