Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdministrative Approvals AAX1982005 - Staff Report/Executive SummaryTO: Planning Commission PROM. Development Services DA'T'E: December 21, 1982 SUBJECT- ADMIN.ISThATIVE ACTION NO. 82-5 APPLICANT REQUEST: LOCATION HISTORY : Heath and Company 3225 Lacy Street Los Angeles, Cali To permit the extended use of a nonconforming sign with a change of copy. Subject property is located on the south side of t,dinger Ave nue , west u " Shea." Lane. On September 8, 1932, the Planning Commission approved Administrative Action No. 82-1, a request to change the copy on an existing 180 square foot freestanding sign. The change of copy was to allow "'The Boys"" to identify their supermarket located in the Edinger Plaza Shopping Center. Subsequent to this approval, there was a change in occupancy with "Safeway" as the new lessee. This tenant, "Safeway" is now re- questing a change in copy on the existing 181 square foot freestanding nonconforming sign. The sign structure, for which copy is being changed, is 25 feet in height and has an area of 180 square feet. This adver- tising area is divided into three equal parts; each advertising a major tenant within the largest buildin.; of toe center, The applicant is-requesting to remcve the upper third of the sign which now read's "The Toys" and replace it with an identification for, Safeway Market. RECOMMENDATION y In view of the above information, the staff recommends that if the applicant concurs the Planning Commission -allow alterations and con-- tinued use of the nonconforming sign for a period of two years. At the conclusion of the} ,two-year period, the sign shall be made to con- ,form to all provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. ATTACHMENTS : 1. Sign elevation 2. Lett er of Justification from Applicant 3. Area Map 4. Admin. Action 82-1 staff report 315 tu*nua"r August City of Huntington riaac.h d j 1 t ant ntsBoazd of Zoning P. 0, Box 19 0 Huntircg #:Cr. B wo h, W • . Attn: Mr . Jar,:c,s T, Pa lir., frcro! ar; Thef copy chr nqe on c• isting role sit 7600 Ed .neer Huntincton z _ach , ca.. Dear Mr. Pali: Please accept this as a ,:aqucst to pernit the change from Market : ! c to ":The Poyz M rket"" in tr_ free standing pole M, iz that had been appro ed tz . t.r a grari up 7"- 11, ll/f,r 75 iai.-d 1:"bich was known as s gn #1. copy Ju tific tic A r strict ccn li;arce with your present sic n ordinance tvil.i result in a subs`Wantial, oconaxnical har-dai ip. B. Our sign is eti Ming,. All we want to :1C is replace the existing Alex faces in the upper sign c aoinet. etc.) in t h e is iediate vj,.ini'ty. A. There are two other tennant , who share the spm"e stru(7-ture. B. We have no a.thorization nor authority to ch nge their signs. C. A precise shopping center i)rograri w .s approved by your organization in "ovetrner knr,win+g that thq whole program could hardly begin before the change in 7anuary, 1.976. D. The major tenants of this site setbac3 from the property like approx n atelv :?5O'. They have little or ro street exposure due to obstruction by existing buildings and required laz.dscapixig, A. T he proposal as per F eath & Co. sketce will no affect other signs in the area. some are much larger and higher (Levity Furniture, HHw tington Center, Angels, Heath and Corpar!Sig nage and re°ated ser,tices nationwide 322$ Lacy Street Box 31074 Lo AG gne:e5, r.,34fotr;6 4137 (213) 223.4=41 A Foaca",roc 7 M F 3 7y ,r, ,.. i;:di3..!• )n r.d VCwr rl ,111 M. James W. Ps li,i August 6r 1982 Page 2 C. There will be n o cha :rc in any of the electrical or aural portion of this 3. The proposal cannot be dot.rinental to the surrounding properties. It waists today. Other oeveloprents coerce after in this sane center. Those signs were allowed under tha* program (up '5-11) (Coast Federal Saving s permitter 5/25/76 and Denny's permitted 3/9/76) just to name a few. 4. Proposed signing will not obstruct or Op de hedentr 'iar, or ve- hicular traffic vision. There cxists 10 ft. of grade clearance now. Our work .i ; conta ined only within the uppermost sign cabinet of this sign 41. An inspection of The area reveals your proposal in in keeping with the character of the premises and the vicini;.y. The fore.''l"ienticn.ed justifications seem to us to be more than uate for approval. We -ask erefor We , t.t w , t 'G+ put Yr 'a on the earliest able agenda or butter still give us aimiriistra r u.pr.'ov-ar.. Please ratify Syl of The Boys Market, Inc. at 5531 ,';oats Visa St., :xgnlrind Par k, Ca. 90 042 as well as this w0 ter, the time and place of such a heari 'ng. W. HEATH , AND CO. 1 . riesea ;;e st er á huntington beach development services r4epar TO: Planning Commissio. FROM: Development Services DATE: September. 8, 1982 -SUBJ ECT: ADMI NISTRAT I VE, ACTION N,-. 82 APPLICANT: ri cath and Company 3225 Lacy Street Los Angeles, California 90031 REQUEST: To permit the extended use of six nonconforming signs and chance of copy on one of the six signs. LOCATION: Subject property is located on the south side of Edinger Avenue , west of Sher Lane, Administrative Action No. 52-1 is a request to change copy on an existing 180 square foot shopping center freestanding sign. The shopping center known asEcd,inger Plaza was approved for construction on May 14, 1.975, and revised October 22, 1975. At that time, the sign code allowed one freestanding sig.. for each detached building with 40 feet separation betw(-en signs.. These signs were also subjected to approval by the Board of Zoning Adjustments prior to issuance of a building permit. The signing program approved by the 8ZA on November 5, 1975, allowed si.x freestanding signs to be con- structed on the site. The subject sign is nonconforming today because: a) more than one freestanding sign exists at this center, b) the sign exceeds the maximum height of 20 feet allowed at a two foot setback,, and cl the sign exceeds the maximum sign area of 100 square feet allowed for a freestanding sign. ANALY SS I S Presently, the site,has six freestanding signs . Heights of tte signs are 25 feet, 20+ feet, 10 feet, and three signs unde r six feet. Allsigns are located within a landscapedp'inter area within 1-5 feet of the frtnt property line. Current sign code provisions only allcw one freestanding sign along Edinger Avenue, on this site. RRINIQUAGM The sign structure for which copy a ; boini,, ehonued i: 25 feet in height and has an area of 180. square feet. This advertising area is divided into three equal. marts, each adverr::i-sing a major tenant within the largest building of, this center, The major tenants within this building, which is sot back .150+ feet from L•'dintler Avenue, need street signing since additional freestanding buildings on the same site obstruct visibility of the wall signing on the building. To require the entire site to conform to the, current code would necessitate the removal of at least five signs including the subject signs. Section x3760>47 t,r:plication to Extend Use of Nonconformi Sign states that " no tw:ithstanclin:3 -the provisions of Section 9760.47, the owner o any nonconforming sign or sign structure that is required to be removed, altered, or replaced pursuant to the provisions hereof, may make application on the form provided for such purpose to the Planning Commission for permission to extend the use of such sign. Said. v-itten application shall. be filet: not less than 15 days pre-- ceedinq the date set out in Section 9760.46 for the alteration, re- moval, or replacement of said sign or sign structure. After a hear- ing, the ' '.:•:ri;ainq Commission may grant permission to extend the time for alteration, removal, or replacement of such sign or sign structure for a period determined by the Planning Commission", „.bn 9760.4 tf , u eit3 , a f f;tlr. f _: 7 r '7 f_l.(.tI7 <;? P a L *; state's that bC fr irI]S r' e r';_ 'n r< dA ifsl;. t_ in do , t he 4'l'1:S37intp ;,C:":"'.1553(,h r . 1: .a., .iCE::Ca..ri t try,, i1 01 Lt1+";' :1) ukait C)e _"atrslz or lar:lfILlr''. lp;:<,. to .aY,113 31t.e!I'stlOrle ro,r"-oval, or t.irc, spociI r?'z i n '- cion 9760;46 will result isi,.a se;[ast a;t:i.,l. oc no r hardship or thrlt the applicant will suffer .reart finanr:i'll loss ncoreby, I)) tt.at t.hti- sign will net adversely affect o. _her 1,-1wfelryR .°,ri_sifns in the sar;tet areas .,) the si io. Will r:,at Lei rh t.i .i:outtiil to t.ne p pit:)Or•I located in thc Vicinity of tIk. l:,tr?'a1'1it'r' Fin l.hi-, i sai d :3i,art is i.C7L't (1) that the sirln will be in kcn_l?irry with the thar;ic*-cr of tf;t someone nq neigh- borhood, and £) that the si<ir: shrill nit obstruct the vision of vehicular or pedestrian Li:affic. The staff has rf.vi ;+'Ci Administrative 1e.tio3 No, 82--1 and made the followlnu determination: The rapplie,rnt has demonstrated that strict compliance with this sign ordinance may result in a substantial economic hardshija., the aopl ic.-rnL had , also elc=rion,tr. a t:e d that the t- ing sign will not adversely affect: other- si(trrs in the area, i;- not det> itrnental to st;rr-oixndirii ar<ltrr.les, insl will not obstruct pedes- trian or vehicular traffic, In view, of the ahov+_* infor.rr,i€ inn, tl)c, :tart rczcirar:lc.ract's that if the applicant concurs the Planning Crr rdssion <-Allow alterations and continued use of the nonconforru,.nq shin for a ;rcer iodof two (2) year At tf,c eonclusion of the two-yz ar p r;e)Cl; the sign shall ,be nnac to conforrt to all provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 3 AA 82-1 Sept. 8, 1982 Page 3 If the applicant does not concur with this rc:com!r,Wation, then the staff recommends that the Pl,,inn.i.n<;(Commission: defy Adrlinist.rativc Action No. 82-2. and re_m ire the applicant to hri.nc; the existing non- conforming sign into eel re,inc. with all provisions of Article 976, Sign Code, of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code.