Loading...
PC R 94-1476RE,SOLUTION NO. 94-1476 A R�SOLUTIOrT Or T'II� PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRAND� GRANTING VARIANC� CASE NO. 94-184, APPLI�D T'OR BY CIIFVRON PRODUCTS USA, AT 251 GRAND AVrNUE WI-I�REAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande has considered Variance Case No. 94-184, filed by Chevron Products USA, to allow signs that exceed the number, heigl�t, total area, and area for a single sign face allowed by the Development Code in the Higl�way Commercial, HC-D-2.11 7one; and WH�REAS, the Planning Commission has held a public hearing on this application in accordance with the City Code; and WIIEREAS, the Planning Commission has found that this project is consistent with the General Plan and the Environmental Documents associated therewith; and WI-I�REAS, the �'lanning 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 WII�REAS, tlie Planning Commission finds, after due study, deliberation and public hearing, the following circumstances exist: 1. The strict or literal interPretation and enforcement of the sign regulations would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship not otherwise shared by others in the surrounding area. /\ survey of similar uses in the vicinity shows that those uses have signs similar to tl�ose signs proPosecl by tlie applicant. 2. There are exceptional or extraordinary circwnstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties c(assified in the same zone. The use is a service station that is required by State Law to provide certain signage. Additionally, this is a highway-oriented use and as such, requires signs that can be readily visible from surrounding highways and roads. 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 tliat is consistent with what is being proposed by the applicant. 4. Tfie granting of tl�e variance will not constitt�te a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same zone. 5. The granting of tl�e variance will not be detrimental to tlie public }�ealth, 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 the City because said signs are important to the success of this and similar businesses but are not out of scale or character with other signs in this zone and vicinity. Resolution No. 94-1476 Variance Case No. 94-184 Clievron Products USA June 21, 1994 P�ge Two NOW, TIIERErORE, I3E IT R�SOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande hereby approves said variance, subject to the standard conditions of tl�e City and those conditions listed below: General Couditions 1. The applicant shall ascertain and comply witt� all State, County and City requirements as are applicable to tl�is project. 2. This application shall automatically expire on June 21, 1996 unless a building permit is issued and substantial construction is commenced and diligently pursued toward completion, or a final inspection is conducted. Thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of tl�e approval, the applicant ►nay apply to the Planning Commission for an extension of one (1) year from the original date of expiration. 3. Development sl�all occur in substantial conformance witll the plans presented to the Planning Commission at the meeting of June 21, 1994 and marked "Ext�ibit A". 4. The applicant sliall agree to defend at his/I�er sole expense any action brought against tt�e City, its agents, officers, or employees because of tlie issuance of said approval, or in the alternative, to relinquisli sucli approval. Tl�e applicant sliall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employers, for any court costs and attorney's fee's whicli lhe 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 sl�all not relieve applicant of his/her obligations under this condition. 5. Approvals of the new C-60 pole sign and the ligl�ted price sign are valid only until tl�e City accepts tl�e offer of dedication for road right of way. The applicant sliall be responsible for removal of tl�e signs upon City acceptance of the offer of dedication. Arcl�itect.ur�l Advisory Co�umitlee Conditions 6. Tl�e ligl�ted price sign in tl�e front planter of tl�e project sliall be a permanent sign similar in appearance to tl�e existing westerly price sign. Plai�uing Dep�rtment Condit.ions 7. All existing signs designated to be removed sl�all be removed after permanent signs have been installed, but prior to final inspection of tlie signs. 8. The new C-60 pole sign shall not encroach more than one foot (1') over the public right- of-way. Resolution No. 94-147G Variance Case No. 94-184 Chevron Products USA June 21, 1994 P�ge Three Building Dep�rtment Co��ditions 9. The applicant sl�all apply for and be granted permits for tl�e signs; shall pay necessary fees; and call for necessary inspections. On motion by Commissioner Keen, seconded by Commissioner Deviny, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYE.S: Commissioners Deviny, Hatcliett, Keen and Acting Chairman Soto NOES: None A13S�NT: Commissioners Tappan, Reilly and Chairman Carr tlie foregoing Resolution was adopted tl�is 21st day of June, 1994. ATTEST: � Nancy Brow Commission Clerk Jol oto, Acting Chairman