Loading...
PC R 95-1533RCSOLUTION NO. 95-1533 A RESOLUTION OF T�iE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE GRANTING VARIANCE CASE NO. 94-186, AMENDMENT �2 FOR SIGN DEVIATIONS, APPLIED FOR BY JlM FREDENBERG, AT 525 TRAFFIC WAY WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande has considered Variance Case No. 94-186, Amendment #2, filed by Jim Fredenberg, to allow signs that exceed the number and total area allowed by the Development Code in the Highway Commercial, HC- D-2.11 Zone; and WIIEREAS, the Planning Commission has held a public hearing on this application in accordance with the City Code; and VVHEREAS, the Planning Commission lias found that this project is consistent with the General Plan and the Environmental Documents associated therewith; and WIiEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed this project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the project is categorically exempt per CEQA Guidelines Section 15311(a); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds, after due study, deliberation and public hearing, the following circumstances exist: 1. The strict or literal interpretation and enForcement of lhe specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship not otherwise shared by others in the surrounding area. 2. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties classified in the same zone. The shape of the building is unique as is the location and the situation of l�aving two separate businesses in a mini mart. 3. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by owners of other properties classified in the same zone because other similar uses generally enjoy signage that is consistent with what is being proposed by the applicant. 4. Tt�e granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same zone. 5. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 6. The granting of a variance is consistent with the objectives and policies of the General Plan and the intent of the Development Code which are to encourage economic vitality and business activity, protect investments while preserving the environment and character of tlie City because said signs are important to the success of this and similar businesses bi�t are not out of scale or character with ott�er signs in this zone and vicinity. Resolutioii No. 95-1533 Variance Case No. 94-186 Amendment �2 Jun Fredenberg November 7, 1995 Page Two NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RFSOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Anoyo Grande hereby approves said variance, subject to the standard conditions of the City and those conditions listed below: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL General Conditions 1. The applicant shall ascertain and comply with all State, County and City requirements as are applicable to this project. 2. This application shall automatically expire on November 7, 1997 unless the signs are installed. Thirty (30) days prior to the expiradon of the approval, the applicant may apply for an extension of one (1) year from the original date of expiration. 3. Development shall occur in substantial conformance with the plans presented to the Planning Commission at the meeting of November 7, 1995 and marked "Exl�ibit A". 4. The applicant shall agree to defend at his/her sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees because of the issuance of said approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any court costs and attorney's fee's which the City, its agents, officers or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his/her obligations under this condition. 5. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval of Conditional Use Permit Case No. 94-524 and Planned Sign Program Case No. 94-114a, Amendment #2. On motion by Commissioner Lubin, seconded by Commissioner Beck, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYFS: Commissioners Lubin, Beck, Soto, lleviny, Tappan and Keen NOES: None AB5ENT: Commissioner Carr � the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 7th day of November, 1995. ATTEST: � . Luc' 1 Breese, Commission Clerk TO CONTENT: Doreen -Blanck, Community Development Director � Jo een, C' e son