Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03 SCE 03-001Report to the ITEM#3 Planning Commission DATE: DECEMBER 8, 2003 SUBJECT: SIGN CODE EXCEPTION 03-001 APPLICANT: MARK FINK DONCO & SONS, INC 1410 N. DALY STREET ANAHEIM, CA 92806 PROPERTY OWNER: ELIZABETH S. PANKEY cio PRICE, CROOKE, GARY 10 CORPORATE PARK, SUITE IRVlNE, CA 92606 ~00 LOCATION: 13872 RED HILL AVENUE ZONING: CENTRAL COMMERCIAL (C-2) ZONING DISTRICT ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15311 OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. (CLASS 11) CALIFORNIA REQUEST: TO MODIFY AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING POLE SIGN RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 3903 denying Sign Code Exception 03-001. BACKGROUND In 1962, the County of Orange issued a Certificate of Use and Occupancy to Mobil Oil Company for a service station at the northeast corner of Red Hill Avenue and El Camino Real (Attachment A - Location Map). In 1967, the County of Orange issued a building permit to Mobil Oil Company to install a pole sign that is seventy-two (72) feet in height and 216 square feet in sign area at the service station. The applicant is requesting approval to update the appearance of the sign and reduce the sign area to 133 square feet. The Tustin Sign Code currently provides for two types of pole signs: Planning Commission Report SCE 03-001 December 8, 2003 Page 2 Pole signs for centers of more than 100,000 square feet or five (5) acres in size, which are a maximum of twenty (20) feet in height and fifty (50) square feet in. sign area. Freeway pole signs for businesses offering food, lodging, or automobile services that are located directly adjacent to the freeway right-of-way, which are a maximum of twenty-four (24) feet in height and fifty (50) square feet in sign area. Since the existing Mobil service station does not meet the criteria for either type of pole sign, the existing pole sign is considered non-conforming. Section 9405e of the Tustin Sign Code states that a legallY established, non-conforming sign may remain and be maintained, subject to the criteria below. If the following criteria are not met, the Director of Community of Development has the authority to require the sign to be made to conform to current sign provisions. A non-conforming sign shall not be changed to another non-conforming sign. A non-conforming sign shall not be structurally altered as to extend its useful life. A sign shall be considered to be structurally altered if the construction materials are physically replaced with new materials. The replacement of face copy in an existing cabinet is not a structural alteration. A non-conforming sign shall not be expanded or altered so as to change the size, shape, position, location or method of illumination of the sign. A non-conforming sign shall not be re-established after discontinuance of the use for ninety (90) days or more. A non-conforming sign shall not be re-established after damage or destruction of more than fifty (50) percent of its replacement value. Since the Tustin Sign Code prohibits the alteration of non-conforming signs, the applicant is seeking approval of a Sign Code Exception. Exceptions to the requirements of the Tustin Sign Code may be considered by the Planning Commission pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9405c. This is not a public hearing item; therefore, official noticing was not required. The applicant was informed of the availability of the agenda and staff report for this item. Planning Commission Report SCE 03-001 December 8, 2003 Page 3 DISCUSSION The applicant is proposing to install a new sign cabinet and sign face displaying "Mobil" in place of five (5) modular cabinets of individual letters that spell "Mobil" on an existing pole (Attachment B - Photo of Existing Pole Sign and Submitted Plans). As shown on the site plan, the existing pole sign is located along the eastern property line at a Mobil service station, approximately fifty (50) feet from the driveway on El Camino Real along the eastern property line. As shown on the elevations, the existing cabinet frame is twenty- eight (28) feet wide and eight (8) feet tall and the new cabinet would be nineteen (19) feet wide and seven (7) feet tall. The new sign would feature a white background, blue letters for the "M .... b .... I" and 'T' and a red letter for "o" and a metal cabinet. In accordance with Tustin Sign Code Section 9405c, specific findings must be met to approve a Sign Code Exception. These findings, and the rationale to deny the request, are outlined below. Attachment C contains the applicant's reasons to support the request. Sign size and placement restrictions of the sign code shall be as closely followed as practicable. The Tustin Sign Code does not permit freeway pole signs for service stations that are not located immediately adjacent to the freeway right-of-way. In addition, businesses that are eligible for freeway pole signs would be limited to a maximum height of twenty-four (24) feet and sign area of fifty (50) square feet. The proposed sign would be seventy-one (71) feet in height with a 133 square foot sign area and far exceed the parameters of other permitted pole signs. In addition, the Tustin Sign Code provides clear direction that non-conforming signs may only be maintained and not altered. As expressly prohibited, the proposed sign would 1) modify a non-conforming sign to another non-conforming sign since a pole sign is not permitted at the project site; 2) result in structural alterations that would create an updated appearance consistent with Mobil Oil Company's current image that would extend the useful life of the sign; and, 3) alter the size and shape of the sign by reducing the overall dimensions of the sign cabinet by thirty-eight (38) percent and eliminating the individual letter cabinets and replacing them with a single cabinet and sign face. While reducing the overall size of a non-conforming sign may seem desirable, the height of the sign will remain approximately the same (i.e., one foot reduction) and the Tustin Sign Code does not authorize any change in size or design of a non-conforming sign even if it would decrease its nonconformity. Planning Commission Report SCE 03-001 December 8, 2003 Page 4 The intent and purpose of the sign regulations of the land use zone in which the sign is to be located shall be followed as closely as practicable. The proposed sign is not permitted at the project site and deviates significantly from the non-conforming provisions of the Tustin Sign Code as described above. The restrictions on permitted freeway pole signs are intended to provide for reasonable signage for freeway-oriented businesses offering food, lodging, or automobile services but to prevent the proliferation of signs on all properties with freeway visibility. In addition, the intent of the Tustin Sign Code is to allow the existing pole sign to be maintained in good repair to continue to provide business identification for the service station, not to allow the pole sign to be significantly altered, improved, or updated to extend its useful life and preclude replacement with conforming signs over time. As such, the proposed sign does not follow the intent and purpose of the sign regulations for freeway-oriented pole signs or non- conforming signs. There are special circumstances unique to the property to justify the exception. The property is similar to other single-tenant commercial properties that are visible from the freeway and provide automobile-oriented services, and there are no special circumstances unique to the property which preclude compliance with the Tustin City Sign Code or justify an exception. Granting the exception will not have a negative impact on the surrounding properties. Granting an exception to provisions that explicitly prohibit modifications to non- confirming signs will set a negative precedent for the treatment of other pole signs within the community. There are a number of non-conforming pole signs along Red Hill Avenue, Newport Avenue, and First Street that could be the subject of similar requests for replacement, and if approved, could further perpetuate the continued existence of pole signs throughout the community. The sign application promotes the public, health, safety, welfare, and aesthetics of the community and that the granting of the exception meets findings and the intent of the sign code. For the reasons outlined above, the proposed sign application does not promote a community benefit and granting the exception would erode the intent of the Tustin Sign Code. Planning Commission Report SCE 03-001 December 8, 2003 Page 5 Matt West Associate Planner Karen Peterson Senior Planner Attachments: Attachment A: Attachment B: Attachment C: Attachment D: Location Map Photograph of Existing Pole Sign and Submitted Plans and Elevations Supplemental Application Resolution No. 3903 s:cdd\pcreport\sce03-001 .doc ATTACHMENT A Location Map PROJECT NO. ADDRESS SCE 03-001 LOCATION: 13872 Red Hill Avenue REQUEST: To modify an existing non-conforming pole sign. A proposed 133 square foot sign cabinet would replace the existing 216 square foot sign cabinet on the property located at 13872 Red Hill Avenue. (Applicant: Donco & Sons, Inc.) ATTACHMENT B Photograph of Existing Pole Sign and Submitted Plans and Elevations Ill 0 03;O;O mm PROJECT ADDRESS: MOBIL SERVICE STATION 13872 RED HILL AVE. TUSTIN, CA 92780 1410 N. DALY ~TREET N*4,N'IEIM, CA 92806 IDonco & Sons, Inc. (714) 254~ ST. UC. # 435816 C-10. 46. 61 SIGN PLAN O z m° P./ I [H~ MOBIL SERVICE STAT ON m ~ co El/~ I Izt"~l ~3872REDHILLAVE. W,~ Donco & Sons, Inc. SIGN PLAN ATTACHMENT C Supplemental Application ( OI MUNtTY ] )tEVE. LOt:PI'-'IENT ...... .g LIPPLEMFILITAL APPu Jiiiiii _qign Code [xeeption ........... -Fustin CHW (~ode ~ection -~0-5C requires the City to make ~ve positive {indings to approve a ~ign C, ode Exception. Please answer ~ the following questions to provide evidence in support of the Is the sign size and placement restrictions of the ~ign Code followed as closely as practicable? SEE ATTACHED the intent and purpbse CE the sign regulczl'ions for the land use zone in which the sign be located followed as closely as practical? SEE ATTACHED _~. Are there special circumstances unique to the proper~y to justify the exception? SEE ATTACHED How would the granting cE tfiae exception no~ have o negative impact on surrounding properties? SEE ATTACHED _5. How does the exception promote the public health, scEetW, welfare and aest-hetics cE the community and the intent cE the _~ign Code? SEE ATTACHED I hereby acknowledge th2t all ~F the information contained in ¢hi_~ supplemental application i~=, Fo The beat of my knowledge and beli~ true and correctly repre¢ented. I hereby grant the Ci~ the ¢uthori~ mo pia~e ¢ public hearing notice on the prope~ for which the sign code exception i¢ requested, if reauired. Land Owner'~ ~ign~ure D~¢e App'lic~¢'~ ~ig~re (if di~ere~r) D~¢e l) 2) 3) 4) The request before the planning commission is not for installation of a new freeway sign, but rather is for the structural alteration of an existing legal non- conforming freeway sign. Consequently, the size and placement restrictions, which were applied at time of the installation of this sign pre-date the size restrictions currently enforced. However, insofar as the current sign regulations allow for replacement of the faces in a non-conforming sign, and the proposal is for replacement of the entire sign with a new, much smaller sign, not only are the current restrictions being followed as closely as is practical but the intent of those restrictions is being considered and adhered to much closer than might be reasonably expected. The intent and purpose of the sign regulations for the land use zone in which this facility is located are followed as closely as is practical with this proposal. As per Section 9401, Chapter 4 of the Tustin City Code; the purpose of the established sign regulations is to "promote community identity and effective business identification through the regulation and design of signs and sign structures within the City of Tustin." As freeway oriented identification signs have been, and are currently allowed for this type of facility, the City of Tustin is cognizant of the need and importance of this type of sign. In Section 9401, Chapter 4, the city establishes and spells out six objectives, which must be met relative to the design and installation of signs in Tustin. The proposal submitted meets each of these objectives. In Section 9405, subsection e, the sign code addresses non- conforming signs. As the city has not established an abatement program for non- conforming signs, the intent of this section is obviously to ensure that this type of sign not be altered in such a way as to increase its degree of non-conformity. Not only does this proposal meet that intent, but the recommendation of planning staff to change faces in the existing sign is in fact contrary to the intent of the section, as such a change would maintain the existing degree of non-conformity, whereas the proposal submitted would actually reduce the degree on non-conformity by 38%. There are in fact special circumstances unique to this property and submittal, which justify the granting of this exception. This submittal requests approval to dramatically reduce the size, and to a lesser degree, the height of a legally existing sign. As the established city codes address non-conforming signs the intent is ostensibly to prohibit the expansion of this type of sign, while this request, rare though it may be, is for a substantial decrease. This unique fact alone warrants serious consideration of this proposal. The granting of this exception would not have a negative impact on surrounding properties. This sign has existed for many years without detrimental impact on surrounding properties. If the proposal before the planning commission were to somehow expand or increase this sign it is recognized that approval of such a request would have a negative impact on surrounding properties. However, by s) virtue of the fact that this request is for a smaller, more attractive sign, it is reasonable to surmise that approval of such request would indeed have a positive impact on surrounding properties as well as the City of Tustin in general. The granting of this exception would promote the public health, safety, welfare, and aesthetics of the community as well as the intent of the sign code. The aesthetic benefits are achieved as a result of the removal of a large sign of a visible dated design and replacing it with a newly designed smaller sign. The public health, safety, and welfare benefits as a result of maintaining an effective advertising display, which allows for motorists wishing to exit the freeway to do so in a safe and orderly fashion. The intent of the sign code is promoted most obviously by the dramatic reduction in the size of the sign, thereby converting a very large, outdated legal non-conforming sign to a new, much smaller legal non- conforming sign. ATTACHMENT D Resolution No. 3903 Ao E° RESOLUTION NO. 3903 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, DENYING SIGN CODE EXCEPTION 03-001, A REQUEST TO MODIFY AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING POLE SIGN BY REPLACING THE EXISTING 216 SQUARE FOOT SIGN CABINET WITH A 133 SQUARE FOOT CABINET SIGN AT 13872 RED HILL AVENUE. The Planning Commission hereby finds and determines as follows: That a proper application, Sign Code Exception 03-001, was filed by Donco & Sons, Inc., requesting authorization to modify an existing non-conforming pole sign by replacing the existing 216 square foot sign cabinet with a 133 square foot cabinet sign at 13872 Red Hill Avenue. That the proposed project would require approval of a sign code exception by the Planning Commission pursuant to Tustin City Code Section 9405c prior to implementation. That the Planning Commission considered this item on December 8, 2003. That this project is Categorically Exempt (Class 11) pursuant to Section 15311 of the California Environmental Quality Act. That pursuant to the criteria set forth in Sign Code Section 9405c, the following findings support denial of the request for a sign code exception: Sign size and placement restrictions of the sign code shall be as closely followed as practicable. The Tustin Sign Code does not permit freeway pole signs for service stations that are not located immediately adjacent to the freeway right-of-way. In addition, businesses that are eligible for freeway pole signs would be limited to a maximum height of twenty-four (24) feet and sign area of fifty (50) square feet. The proposed sign would be seventy-one (71) feet in height with a 133 square foot sign area and far exceed the parameters of other permitted pole signs. In addition, the Tustin Sign Code provides clear direction that non-conforming signs may only be maintained and not altered. As expressly prohibited, the proposed sign would 1) modify a non-conforming sign to another non-conforming sign since a pole sign is not permitted at the project site; 2) result in structural alterations that would create an updated appearance Resolution No. 3903 SCE 03-001 Page 2 consistent with Mobil Oil Company's current image that would extend the useful life of the sign; and, 3) alter the size and shape of the sign by reducing the overall dimensions of the sign cabinet by thirty-eight (38) percent and eliminating the individual letter cabinets and replacing them with a single cabinet and sign face. While reducing the overall size of a non-conforming sign may seem desirable, the height of the sign will remain approximately the same (i.e., one foot reduction) and the Tustin Sign Code does not authorize any change in size or design of a non-conforming sign even if it would decrease its nonconformity. The intent and purpose of the sign regulations of the land use zone in which the sign is to be located shall be followed as closely as practicable. The proposed sign is not permitted at the project site and deviates significantly from the non-conforming provisions of the Tustin Sign Code as described above. The restrictions on permitted freeway pole signs are intended to provide for reasonable signage for freeway-oriented businesses offering food, lodging, or automobile services but to prevent the proliferation of signs on all properties with freeway visibility. In addition, the intent of the Tustin Sign Code is to allow the existing pole sign to be maintained in good repair to continue to provide business identification for the service station, not to allow the pole sign to be significantly altered, improved, or updated to extend its useful life and preclude replacement with conforming signs over time. As such, the proposed sign ~loes not follow the intent and purpose of the sign regulations for freeway-oriented pole signs or non-conforming signs. There are special circumstances unique to the property to justify the exception. The property is similar to other single-tenant commercial properties that are visible from the freeway and provide automobile-oriented services, and there are no special circumstances unique to the property which preclude compliance with the Tustin City Sign Code or justify an exception. Granting the exception will not have a negative impact on the surrounding properties. Granting an exception to provisions that explicitly prohibit modifications to non-confirming signs will set a negative precedent for the treatment of other pole signs within the community. There are a number of non-conforming pole Resolution No. 3903 SCE 03-001 Page 3 signs along Red Hill Avenue, Newport Avenue, and First Street that could be the subject of similar requests for replacement, and if approved, could further perpetuate the continued existence of pole signs throughout the community. The sign application promotes the public, health, safety, welfare, and aesthetics of the community and that the granting of the exception meets findings and the intent of the sign code. For the reasons outlined under items 1 through 4 above, the proposed sign application does not promote a community benefit and granting the exception would erode the intent of the Tustin Sign Code. II. The Planning Commission hereby denies Sign Code Exception 03-001, a request to modify an existing non-conforming pole sign by replacing the existing 216 square foot sign cabinet with a 133 square foot cabinet sign at 13872 Red Hill Avenue. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Tustin, at a regular meeting on the 8th day of December, 2003. Linda C. Jennings Chairperson ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, Elizabeth A. Binsack, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 3903 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 8th day of December, 2003. ELIZABETH A. BINSACK Planning Commission Secretary