HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC RES 97-079 1 RESOLUTION NO. 97-79
2 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUSTIN REAFFIRMING APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL
3 USE PERMIT 90-1, AUTHORIZING THE INSTALLATION
OF A DOUBLE-FACED FREEWAY POLE SIGN 35 FEET IN
4 HEIGHT AND 50 SQUARE FEET IN AREA PER SIGN
FACE ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 14041 NEWPORT
5 AVENUE.
6 The City Council does hereby resolve as follows:
7 I. The City Council finds and determines as follows:
8 A. That on june 18, 1990, the City Council
adopted Resolution No. 90-52 approving
9 Conditional Use Permit 90-1, authorizing the
installation of a double-faced freeway pole
10 sig.n 35 feet in height and 50 square feet in
area per sign face on the property located at
11 14041 Newport AvenUe, subject to the following
condition (Condition II.E):
12
Prior to issuance of a building
13 permit for the sign, the applicant
and owner(s) of the subject property
14 shall enter into an agreement with
the City in which they agree to
15 reduce the height of the sign as to
a height determined by
16 recommendation of the Planning
Commission and to the City Council
17 (but to a height of not .less than
twenty four feet) after completion
18 of freeway widening improvements
have been made to the south side of
19 I-5 Freeway adjacent to the subject
property, said reconsideration shall
20 take place not later than ninety
(90) days after completion of said
21 improvements. Said agreement shall
be a covenant to run with the land
22 supported by a surety bond for a
period' of not longer than five (5)
23 years, each to be in form and
content satisfacnory to- the 'City
24 Attorney.
25
26
27
28
Resolution No. 97-79
Page 2
1
2 B. That the applicant and property owners aqreed
to future reconsideration of the approved'sign
3 height as evidenced. by the signing of an
agreement and the posting of a surety bond
4 prior to the issuance of a building permit for
the sign on February 21, 1991.
5
C. That, according to Caltrans, said freeway
6 improvements were completed on June 7, 1996,
and the City commenced reconsideration of
7 Conditional Use Permit 90-1 on July 1,-1996.
8 D. Than a public hearing was duly called, noticed
and held on said reconsideration on July 28,
9 1997 by the Planning Commission. The Planning
Commission adopted Resolution No. 3531,
10 regommending that the City Council reaffirm
approval of Conditional Use Permit 90-1.
11
E. That a public hearing was duly called, by th~
12 City Council on AugUst 18, 1997.
13 F. That the sign should be allowed to remain at
the height, configuration and location
14 originally approved by the City Council on
June 18, 1990 based upon the following
15 findings:
16 1. The-freeway improvements referenced in
City Council Resolution No. 90-52 have
17 not increased the visibility of the sign
in a manner that would render the height
18 of thirty five (35) feet above grade
excessive. Hence, the sign poses no
19 greater visual impact to the community as
a result of the completion of the I-5
20 widening project than it had prior to the
commencement of the freeway improvements..
21
2. Lowering the sign will slightly reduce
22 the level of exposure to passing freeway
traffic which is used to provide future
23 reference, not impulse business. The
sign is visible upon approaching the
24 subject property to provide advertisement
for future business, but is slightly
25 obstructed by a raised freeway median.
Lowering the sign would further obs.truct
26 its visibility.
27
28
-Resolution No, 97-79
Page 3
1
2 3, Raising the sign will not benefit the
subject business due to the intervening
3 visual obstructions created by said
recent freeway improvements, The
4 entrance to the Newport Avenue offramp is
located approximately 7/10ths of a mile
'5 .from the subject property. In this
vicinity, the visibility of the sign is
6 completely Obstructed by the flyovers
connecting the I-5 to the Newport (SR-55)
7 Freeway. Due to the distance of the sign
to the offramp entrance, and the varying
8 heights and curvatures of the overpabses,
no sign, regardless of height, could
9 attract impulse business from this
location. Moreover, although the sign is
10 slightly obstructed from view along
certain points in a northbound direction
11 on the i-5 freeway, there is no offramp
to Newport Avenue from the northbound
12 lanes of the Ii5 to facilitate impulse
business, so the visibility of the sign
13 is adequate to provide reference for
future business.
14
II. The City Council hereby reaffirms approval of
15 Conditional Use Permit 90-1 authorizing the
installation of a double-faced freeway pole sign 35
16 feet in height and 50 square feet in area per smgn
face on the property located at 14041 Newport
17 Avenue, subject to the conditions contained in
Resolution No. 90-52, noting that Condition II.E of
18 said Resolution is hereby satisfied.
19 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Tustin
City Council, held on the 18th day of August, 1997.
20
22 , THOMAS'
YOR
24 P~ELA TOKER v ~.
S
CITY CLERK
25
26
27
28
City of Tustin
RESOLUTION CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss'
CITY OF TUSTIN )
RESOLUTION NO. 97-79
Pamela Stoker, 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 is five; that the above and foregoing
resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council
held on the 18th day of August, 1997,-by the following vote:
COUNCILMEMBER AYES: Thomas, Saltarelli, Doyle, Potts
COUNCILMEMBER NOES: None
COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: None
COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: Worley
Pamel~a' St6ker, Cl~~erk