Findings - CC - 2000 - DR-9-00 - 2 Monuent Signs For 30 W State St.
ORIGINAL
BEFORE THE EAGLE CITY COUNCIL
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION
FOR TWO MONUMENT SIGNS FOR JACKSON'S
FOOD STORE
)
)
)
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
CASE NUMBER DR-9-00
The above-entitled design review application came before the Eagle City Council for their action
on March 14,2000. The Eagle City Council, having heard and taken oral and written testimony,
and having duly considered the matter, makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
Law;
FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. PROJECT SUMMARY:
Jackson's Food Stores, represented by Eric Williams with Young Electric Sign
Company, is requesting design review approval of two monument signs for
Jackson's Food Store. The site is located on the northwest corner of State Street
and Eagle Road at 30 West State Street.
APPLICATION SUBMITTAL:
The City of Eagle received the application for this item on February 2,2000.
/r
B.
c.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
Notice of this public hearing was mailed to property owners abutting the subject
property in accordance with Eagle City Code on February 18, 2000.
HISTORY OF RELEVANT PREVIOUS ACTIONS:
On December 9, 1999, the City of Eagle Design Review Board recommended
approval, with conditions, ofDR-43-99 (two monument signs for Jackson's Food
Store). However the applicant withdrew this application on January 11, 2000
before Eagle City Council acted on the Zoning Administrator's appeal of the
application.
D.
E.
F.
COMPANION APPLICATIONS: None
ZONING DESIGNATION: CBD (Central Business District)
Page 1 of 7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\DR&MSP\2000\DR-O9-00 sign ccfdoc
G.
SIGNAGE:
Si n Data
Monument Si n
Pro osed
Re uired
Sign Dimensions
8' high x 10' wide
8' high (maximum - unless
further restricted due to sign area
concerns per Eagle City Code
Section 8-2A-8 K
50-square feet (maximum-
unless further restricted per
Eagle City Code Section 8-2A-
8K
Area of Signage
46.6-square feet (approx.)
Interior-illumination rohibited
140-square feet (minimum)
Illumination
Sign Landscaping
Ground mounted fluorescent lam s
H.
1.
AGENCY RESPONSES: None
LETTERS FROM THE PUBLIC: None received to date
ST AFF ANALYSIS PROVIDED:
A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROVISIONS, WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN
REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL: (None)
ZONING CODE PROVISIONS WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDING
THIS PROPOSAL:
B.
. The general theme of the Design Review Overlay District is to encourage the use of
American Northwest and 1870 through 1930 architectural styles and the use of those
materials, graphics and architectural designs set forth in the DR chapter.
. Signage for any project shall provide for business identification and minimize clutter
and confusion on and off the site. Signs are to provide effective and necessary
business identification systems adapted to the building design.
.
Section 8-2A- 7 (E)(7)
All landscape areas adjacent to vehicular areas are to be protected with an
approved curbing material.
.
Section 8-2A- 7(K)(3)(a)
Provide a minimum five foot (5') wide perimeter landscaped strip between the
property lines and the parking lot, and plant with a minimum of one shade tree
and five (5) shrubs per thirty five (35) linear feet of perimeter.
.
Section 8-2A- 7(J)(3)( d)
Chainlink fencing, with slats or otherwise, is prohibited for screening.
Page 2 of 7
K:\PJanning Dept\EagJe Applications\DR&MSP\2000\DR-O9-00 sign ccf.doc
C.
.
Section 8-2A-8(C)(5)
Sign materials and overall appearance shall compliment with the building
architecture and colors as detennined by the Design Review Board.
Section 8-2A-8(K)
.
.
Signs in The Entire Design Review Overlay District: 1. No signs shall be erected
or maintained in any district as established by the Zoning Ordinance except those
signs specifically enumerated in this Chapter. The number and area of signs as
outlined in this Chapter are intended to be maximum standards which do not
necessarily ensure architectural compatibility. Therefore, in addition to the
enumerated standards. consideration shall be given to a sign's relationship to the
overall appearance ofthe subject property as well as the surrounding community.
Compatible design, simplicity and sign effectiveness are to be used in establishing
guidelines for sign approval.
Section 8-2A-8(A)
"Definitions" "AREA OF SIGN": The entire area within a single, contiguous
perimeter enclosing the extreme limits of writing, representation, emblem or any
figure or similar character, together with any fonn or other material or color
fonning an integral part of the display, or used to differentiate such sign from the
background against which it is placed. The area of the sign shall not include the
necessary supports or uprights on which the sign is placed, and superficial,
nonilluminated column covers, ornamental trim and other such incidental objects
attached thereto which are not designed to convey a message.
DISCUSSION:
.
The landscape island that is proposed at the southwest comer of the site is odd in
shape creating an area not usable for parking between the proposed landscape island
and the building to the west. The applicant stated that the reason they had not
proposed the landscaping to the west of the proposed island was because the access to
the main fuel tanks was located in that area. Staff has visited the site and has noted
on Exhibit' A' the approximate location of the three access points to the main fuel
tanks. This landscape island should be reconstructed to increase the landscape island
as shown on Exhibit' A', therefore increasing the plantings on site. This would
define the parking angle, rather then having a large area where parking could get
confusing and people backing over the new landscape island.
The applicant should be required to increase the area around the proposed sign located
at the northeast comer of the site. The landscaping in that area is 4' in width. There is
l' on the north and south side of this sign for plantings. Eagle City Code requires that
the applicant provide a minimum of 5' wide perimeter landscaped strip between the
property lines and the parking lot, and plant with a minimum of one shade tree and
five shrubs per thirty five linear feet of perimeter. Staff recommends that the
applicant increase the size of the landscape strip to a minimum of 5' wide or increase
the planter in the area around the sign to allow for adequate landscaping to be
installed around the sign (see Exhibit 'B').
There is chainlink fence located along the north property line. The applicant should
.
.
Page 3 of 7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\DR&MSP\2000\DR-O9-00 sign ccf.doc
.
be required to remove the chainlink fence with slats that is located along the north
property line. The sign proposed at the northeast comer would not be visible if the
fence is not removed.
The applicant is proposing a cabinet style monument sign. The Design Review Board
recently saw a cabinet sign for Pizza Hut. The applicant of Pizza Hut was required to
submit a revised plan for their cabinet style monument sign to provide some
architectural design. The applicant of Jackson's Food Store should be required to
provide some architectural design element over the top of this sign to eliminate the
modem look of the cabinet style design projecting from the monument base.
.
Based upon a visual inspection of the site and the surrounding area, consideration of
letters received from Design Review Board Members (James G. Murray, AlA, Eric
McCullough, and Melissa S. Anderson) and consideration of the area of the signs
proposed, staff recommends that both monument signs not exceed 6- feet in height to
limit the area for compatibility.
Staff defers comment regarding other design issues and color of all proposed signs to
the Design Review Board.
.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD:
A. A public hearing on the application was held before the Design Review Board on March 9,
2000. Testimony was taken, the public hearing was closed, and the Board made their
recommendation at that time.
B. Oral testimony in opposition to the application was presented by no one.
C. Oral testimony in favor of the application was presented by no one (not including the
applicant).
BOARD DECISION:
The Board voted 3 to 0 (Murray and McCullough absent) to recommend approval of the
two monument signs with the Board conditions which were stated in the memo to
Council dated March 10, 2000.
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S APPEAL TO THE COUNCIL:
A. A public hearing on the appeal of the application was held before the City Council on March
14, 2000. Testimony was taken, the public hearing was closed, and the City Council took
action at that time.
B. Oral testimony in opposition to the application was presented by no one.
C. Oral. testimony in favor of the application was presented by no one (not including the
applicant).
D. Written opposition regarding the area of the monument signs were received by Design
Review Board Chainnan James G. Murray, AlA, and Members Eric McCullough, and
Melissa S. Anderson.
COUNCIL DECISION:
The Council voted 4 to 0 to approve the two monument signs with the following site
Page 4 of 7
K:\PJanning Dept\Eagle Applications\DR&MSP\2000\DR-O9-00 sign ccfdoc
specific and standard conditions of approval.
SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. The landscape island located at the southwest comer of the site shall be reconstructed to
increase the landscape island as shown on Exhibit 'A' (provided within the staff report),
therefore increasing the plantings on site. Provide a revised site and landscape plan showing
the island increased as shown on Exhibit' A' (provided within the staff report) to be reviewed
and approved by staff and one member of the Design Review Board prior to issuance of a
sign permit.
2. The applicant shall increase the size of the landscape strip to a minimum of 5' wide or
increase the planter in the area around the sign to allow for adequate landscaping to be
installed around the sign as shown on Exhibit 'B'(provided within the staff report). Provide a
revised site and landscape plan showing the island increased as shown on Exhibit
'B'(provided within the staff report) to be reviewed and approved by staff and one member of
the Design Review Board prior to issuance of a sign permit.
3. The applicant shall be required to construct concrete curb around the planters.
4. The applicant shall be required to remove the chain link fence with slats that is located along
the north property line.
5. The revised plan submitted March 13, 2000, showing the cultured stone around the entire
sign is the approved sign design. In accordance with Eagle City Code Section 8-2A-8 (K)(l),
to decrease the overall area of the signs, the maximum height of each monument sign
(including the cultured stone) shall be 6' and the width shall not exceed 10'. The applicant
shall be required to submit a revised plan of the monument signs modifying the area of the
signs as required herein to be reviewed and approved by staff and one member of the Design
Review Board prior to issuance of a sign permit.
6. The floodlights used to illuminate the monument signs shall be screened or located so they do
not shine onto the roadway or onto any nearby property. The light fixtures shall be concealed
or screened with perimeter landscaping providing a 12 month screen of sufficient height and
density to conceal such fixtures.
7. Interior illumination is not permitted for monument signs.
8. The existing non-conforming pole sign shall be removed prior to issuance of a sign permit.
9. A sign permit is required prior to a sign being constructed on this site.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. A building permit/zoning permit shall be required prior to construction of any sign
which is not attached to a building with an active building permit.
2. Approval shall expire without notice to the applicant on the date of expiration of this Design
Review, as stipulated in Eagle City Code (one year from the Design Review Board approval
date).
3. The Americans with Disabilities Act, Uniform Building Code, Eagle City Code, and all
applicable County, State and Federal Codes and Regulations shall be complied with. All
design and construction shall be in accordance with all applicable City of Eagle Codes unless
Page 5 of 7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\DR&MSP\2000\DR-O9-00 sign ccf.doc
specifically approved by the Commission and/or Council.
4. New plans which incorporate any required changes shall be submitted for staff approval.
Staff may elect to take those plans to the Design Review Board and/or the Planning and
Zoning Commission for review and approval.
5. Any changes to the plans and specifications upon which this approval is based, other than
those required by the above conditions, will require submittal of an application for
modification and approval of that application prior to commencing any
6. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this
application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances,
plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its
successors in interest advises the City of Eagle of its intent to change the planned use of the
subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted
pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought.
7. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in
writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an
authorized representative of the City of Eagle. The burden shall be upon the applicant to
obtain written confirmation of any change from the City of Eagle.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on February 2,2000.
2. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to abutting property owners of the subject property
in accordance with the requirements of Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code and Eagle City
Code on February 18,2000.
3. On March 13, 2000, the applicant was notified of the March 14,2000, City Council meeting
for the Zoning Administrator's appeal of the application to the City Council in accordance
with Eagle City Code Section 8-2A-14 (B) and the applicant's representative, Eric Williams
attended and spoke at the meeting.
4. The Design Review Application, as conditioned herein, is in accordance with the general and
specific requirements of Eagle City Code Title 8, "Zoning", Chapter 2, "Zoning Districts and
Maps", Article A, "DR Design Review Overlay District".
5. The Council found that the area of signs as proposed by the applicant did not ensure
architectural compatibility, as outlined within Eagle City Code Section 8-2A-8 (K)(l) and the
area was decreased by the Council because:
a. The sign's would have been too large in relationship to the overall appearance of the
subject property;
b. The sign's would have been too large in relationship to the surrounding community and
entry statement at the northwest comer of State Street and Eagle Road;
c. Although the sign's proposed architectural elements (i.e.: river rock around the sign text
area, landscaping at the base, etc) provided design compatibility with the architectural
quality of the remodeled buildings in the area and area in general, the overall area of the
sign was found to be unbalanced, in that it was too large;
d. The Council found that sign effectiveness could still be achieved with the decrease in area
Page 6 of 7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\DR&MSP\2000\DR-O9-00 sign ccfdoc
required by the Council herein because:
i. The speed limit for the roadways abutting the site are 25 mph allowing more time
for drivers to view a sign with a lesser area;
The site is on a comer parcel providing more visibility for drivers;
No parking is permitted on Eagle Road in this location, allowing for enhanced
visibility of a smaller sign;
The sign on State Street is set back from the sidewalk because of driveway sight
visibility concerns and that location would allow for better visibility of the sign
for eastbound traffic if a car was parked on State Street in that general location;
and
No parking is permitted near the State Street driveway where the State Street sign
is proposed and that would allow for better visibility of the State Street sign from
eastbound traffic on State.
11.
111.
IV.
v.
DATED this 11 th day of April, 2000.
CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF EAGLE
Ada County, Idaho
~CkY~
ATTEST:
,,?)~MU':rti!'>.
'I.':'>'" ("¡ ":'; Þ- ~"""i'.
..""...1 ..j ¡. ':"':';';~'.
.." <", ,. "",.~<>.t>". }",'
¡ Ù <~c,~,. " '",,~...,;-.,.\t"':.ì,
:: ;--' ."yo"..¡...",. "
:: ¿: c".o .r t> .. ~:,
F ..,¡~,o ,'.'-.,' ':) ~... It - <i.~ ~
0, '" ' ;:
.. ,"" i!'",:' ft T ,,'" , ,
~ . ,:".Ltj. , . J :;
S ~
0:.. r.. .
",.L' ' 0,../
'~~'" '. .
'.~, _;0
"'. -
hi ~<> ¥-- ~
V'Sharori'Moore, Eagle City CI rk
Page 7 of 7
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\DR&MSP\2000\DR-O9-00 sign ccf.doc