My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2000-034 - Denying Variance No. 00-01
Clerk
>
Resolutions
>
CITY COUNCIL
>
2000 - 2010
>
2000
>
2000-034 - Denying Variance No. 00-01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/3/2012 12:29:48 PM
Creation date
6/26/2003 10:47:02 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Resolution
Doc #
2000-034
Date
5/1/2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
138 <br /> <br />There does not, however, appear to be grounds to justify the enlargement <br />of the pdmary building sign given the increase in the size of the pylon sign <br />adjacent to the projects street frontage and the extra secondary signage <br />proposed on the primary building elevation. Approval of a variance for the <br />increase in the length and size of primary building signage would be <br />inconsistent with the privileges afforded other commercial centers of a <br />similar size and nature. Applying the City's sign code will balance or <br />center the primary building sign within the allowable signable area and <br />reduce sign clutter on the pdmary elevation. <br /> <br />That the granting of a vadance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment <br />of one or more substantial property rights. <br /> <br />This Council finds that the corporate signage proposed by the applicant <br />may lead to the gross proliferation of signage on the building and around <br />the site which is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of any <br />substantial property rights and would be inconsistent with the privileges <br />afforded other commemial centers of a similar size and nature. <br /> <br />That the granting of a variance will not be materially detrimental to the public <br />welfare or injurious to surrounding property. <br /> <br />The project may be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious <br />to surrounding property as proposed. The City sign code and the sign <br />variances being sought are consistent w'~ signage requirements of a <br />commercial center of this size and scale. However, the applicant has <br />testified that the signage sought is the standard corporate signage for the <br />Home Depot. This Council finds that similar corporate signage for this <br />applicant has resulted in the gross proliferation of additional signage on and <br />around the front of the building site. Signage on the building or the site in <br />excess of that approved by vadance and that allowed by City code would <br />be materially detrimental to the public welfare and have a deleterious <br />effect to surrounding property. The proliferation of signage leads to sign <br />clutter and creates a visual blight of an unkempt building and site <br />appearance. <br /> <br />That the granting of a vadance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the <br />City. <br /> <br />The granting of variances will not adversely affect the General Plan of the <br />City. The retail Center was approved in conformance with City zoning, <br />development and General Plan requirements. Signage is ancillary to the <br />project previously approved and a necessary component of a commercial <br />center. <br /> <br />Resolution No. 2000-034 <br />Page2 of 3 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.