Loading...
PC R 95-1509RTSOLUTION NO. 95-1509 A RFSOLUTION OT TIi� PLANNING COMMISSION OF T�IE CITY Or ARROYO GRANDE R�COMM�NDING APPROVAL OT' vAKIANCC CAS� NO. 95-189, AI'PLI�D FOR BY OTTS�, INC. TO TIIT: CITY COUNCIL WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande has considered Variance Case No. 95-189, filed by Ottse, Inc.,� to allow flags and allow signs that exceed the number, heigl�t, total area, and area for a single sign face allowed by the Development Code; and WHER�AS, the Planning Commission has held a public hearing on this application in accordance with the City Code; and WH�REAS, the Planning Commission has found that this project is consistent with the General Plan and the Environmental Documents associated therewith; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed this project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CLQA) and has determined that the project is categorically exempt per CEQA Guidelines Section 15311(a); and WIIER�AS, tl�e Planning Commission finds, after due study, deliberation �nd public hearing, t}ie following circumstances exist: 1. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of tlie sign regulations would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardsf�ip not otl�erwise sliared by otl�ers in tlie surrounding area. Tl�e present depressed economic climate -in California warrants an extra effort to draw people to the project site. Because this area has been hard l�it by tl�e lack of available buyers in all price ranges, especially in the custom home market, billboards are necessary to bring every possible prospect from the freeway. 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 ott�er properties classified in tl�e same�zone. Tlie property comprises 287 acres witl� 353 proposed dwelling units. This large area makes standard signage inadequate. Also, due to a lack of visibility from public roads, Rancho Grande is precluded from easy access and viewing of tl�e sales office and home sites. Rariclio Grande is set back several }�undred feet from East Brancl� Street and at a different elevation. Rancho Parkway is a winding road which limits visibility to the sales office. Signs are necessary to draw attention, not only to tl�e presence of new l�ome sites, but also to guide interested persons to the sales office. .Tl�e proposed signs of tl�e Sign Program enclosed are for temporarX use which are for identification and guidance purPoses. All signs and flags are for temporary use. Tl�e billboarcf size is necessary for increased visibilitY from Higi�way 101. 3. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by owners of otlier properties classified in tlle same zone. 4. The granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same zone. � _J Resolutioii No. 95-1509 Variance CASe No. 95-189 Ottse, Inc. June 6, 1995 Page Two 5. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to tlie public healtt�, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The flags associated with the information signs will be kept in good condition and replaced when signs of fading or tearing appear. 6. The granting of a variance is consistent witl� tl�e objectives and policies of tl�e General Plan and the intent of the Development Code which are to encourage economic vitality and business activily, protect investments while preserving the environment and character of tlie City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT R�SOLV�D that the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande hereby recommends approval of said variance to the City Council, subject to the standard conctitions of the City and those conditions listed below: GenerAl Conditions 1. The applicant shall ascextain and co►nply with all State, County and City requirements as are applicable to tliis project. 2. This application shall automatically expire on , 1997 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 the approval, the applicant may apply to the Planning Commission for an extension of one (1) year from the origirtal date of expiration. 3. Development shall occur in substantial conformance with the plans presented to the City Council at the meeting of , 1995 and marked "Exhibit A". 4. The applicant shalI agree to defend at his/t�er 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. Tl�e applicant sl�all reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employers, 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 af its own expense in the defense of any such action but sucll participation shall not relieve applicant of his/her obligations under this condition. On motion by Commissioner Tappan, seconded by Commissioner Deviny, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Tappan, Soto, Carr, Deviny, Beck and Chairperson Keen NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Hatcl�ett the foregoing Resolution was adopted tliis 6ti� day of June, 1995. ATTEST: Nan o n, Commi ion CI J Keen, C�' rson � J �� �