The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCC RES 01-28]0 ]2 ]4 ]5 ]? 20 ~2 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 01-28 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION AND DENYING THE APPEAL OF SIGN CODE EXCEPTION 00-001, A REQUEST FOR REFACING AN EXISTING JOINT USE FIFTY (50) SQUARE FOOT MONUMENT SIGN FOR BUSINESS IDENTIFICATION OF THE' BUSINESSES LOCATED AT 145 WEST FIRST STREET (SURFAS FURRIERS) The City Council hereby resolve as follows: The City Council finds and determines as follows' Ao That a proper application, Sign Code Exception 00-001, was filed by Arnold Surfas requesting approval to reface an existing fifty square foot joint use monument sign previously approved for identification of businesses located at 145 and 155 West First Street for exclusive use of businesses at 145 West First Street. Bo 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. C,, That the Planning Commission considered this item on October 23, 2000, and continued the matter to January 22, 2001, and February 12, 2001. On February 12, 2001, the Planning Commission denied the request by adopting Resolution No. 3755. That the applicant appealed the Planning Commission's decision on February 20, 20'01. · Ee That a.public hearing was duly called, noticed, and held-on said appeal on March 19, 2001, by the City Council. Fo 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: · The request is not consistent with the intent of the City Council's approval of the original sign exemption. In 1977, the City Council approved a sign exemption and a sign permit was issued on the basis that the combined street frontage of 145 and 155 West First Street would provide sufficient frontage to meet the requirements of the Sign Code for installation of a Resolution No. 01-28 March 19, 2001 Page 2 2 3 4 s 6 s 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1~ la 19 20 21 22 23 24 2s 2v 2~ 2s 29 monument sign. Based on the Council's action, it does not appear a sign exemption would have been approved if shared use of the sign for both properties was not proposed or provided. The applicant modified the sign, thereby eliminating joint use with the adjacent property. The current sign code exception request would benefit one property which is inconsistent with the intent of the City Council's exemption. 2. The sign size and placement restrictions of the sign code are not as closely followed as practicable. As Individual Business Identification, the sign exceeds the allowable sign area by eight (8) feet, identifies three tenants rather than one as allowed, provides only 57 percent of the required street frontage, and does not maintain the required separation from the side property line. As Center Identification, the center does not include three (3) valid businesses, the sign area exceeds allowable sign area for tenants, provides only 43 percent of the required street frontage, and does not maintain the required separation from the side property line. The sign deviates significantly from the requirements of the Tustin City Sign Code and does not follow the restrictions as closely as practicable. A wall sign could be located on the building that would be visible to east- and west-bound traffic. 3. The intent and purpose of the sign regulations of the land use zone in which the sign is to be located are not followed as closely as practicable. The purpose and intent of the sign regulations for the commercial district are to prevent proliferation of signs along a commercial corridor while providing for reasonable signage that is compatible with the size of the property. The proposed sign would establish a sign that would not otherwise be allowed due to the limited street frontage. In addition, as Individual Business Identification, the sign exceeds the allowable sign area by eight (8) feet, identifies three tenants rather than one as allowed, and does not maintain the required separation from the side property line. As Center Identification, the center does not contain three valid businesses, the sign area exceeds allowable sign area for tenants and does not maintain the required separation from the side property line. The proposed sign does not follow the intent and purpose of the sign regulations for commercial properties. 4. There are no special circumstances unique to the property to justify the exception. l0 20 2! 22 23 24 25 2(; 27 28 29 Resolution No. 01-28 March 19, 2001 Page 3 The property is similar to other properties along First Street, and there are no special circumstances unique to the property which preclude compliance with the Tustin City Sign Code or justify an exception. Although the main portion of the building is setback from First Street, there is a blank wall facing First Street which is only thirty-three feet from the front property line that could provide for sufficient wall sign that would be visible to east- and west-bound traffic. II. . Granting the exception surrounding properties. will have a negative impact on the The proposed monument sign will have a negative effect on surrounding properties in that the sign is not. compatible with the building and the adjacent properties.. The proposed sign appears to be out of scale with the project and is not compatible with the design features of the building. The proposed tenant signs also present a variety of information including phone numbers and supplemental 'information in a variety of font types that are not integrated into a harmonious design. In addition, granting a sign code exception based on the sign area, number of tenant signs,, street frontage, and separation requirements would set a precedent for other properties that do not meet the requirements for a monument sign. , The sign application does not promote the public health, safety, welfare, and aesthetics of the community and granting the exception does not meet the findings and intent of the sign code. The sign design does not promote the aesthetics of the community since it does not complement the building, 'appears out of scale With the surrounding area, and presents a variety of' information that is not successfully integrated into a harmonious design. In addition, authorization of a monument sign for a property with less than 150 feet or 200 feet as required by the Sign Code would set a precedent for other commercial properties with less than the required street frontage and could initiate a proliferation of seventeen (17) additional monument signs along First Street. The City Council hereby upholds the Planning Commission's action and denies the appeal of Sign Code Exception 00-001 to reface an existing fifty square foot joint use monument sign previously approved for identification of businesses located at 145 and 155 West First Street for exclusive use of businesses at 145 West First Street. 2 3 4 5 6 8 ~o 1~ ~2 13 14 15 16 17 ~8 ~y 20 2~ 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Resolution No. 01-28 ` March 19, 2001 Page 4 PASSED AND ADOPTED by City of Tustin City Council, at a regular meeting on the 19`h day of March, 2001. ~~~ Tracy WiII~J Orley Mayor 'I Pamela Stoker City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS CITY OF TUSTIN ) I CERTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION NO. 01-28 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 of the City of Tustin is five; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 01-28 was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 19th day of March, 2001, by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBER AYES: woxr,~, ~or~s, no~.E, xAwASan~ COUNCILMEMBER NOES: BoxE COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: xorrE COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: rroxE Pamela Stoker, City Clerk