Findings - DR - 2001 - DR-71-01 - Construct 2 Monument Signs At The Entry To Castlebury Subdivision 990 E Chinden Blvd
OR\G\NAL
BEFORE THE EAGLE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR
A DESIGN REVIEW FOR TWO MONUMENT
SIGNS FOR CASTLEBURY SUBDIVISION
FOR CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT INc.
)
)
)
)
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
CASE NUMBERDR-71-01
The above-entitled design review application came before the Eagle Design Review Board for their
action on November 15,2001. The Eagle Design Review Board 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.
B.
PROJECT SUMMARY:
Capital Development Inc., represented by David Koga with The Land Group, is
requesting design review approval to construct two monument signs at the entry to
Castlebury Subdivision. The site is located on the north side of Chinden Boulevard
approximately ~-mile west of Locust Grove Road at 990 East Chinden Boulevard.
APPLICATION SUBMITTAL:
The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on October 4, 2001.
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 October 19,2001.
D.
HISTORY OF RELEVANT PREVIOUS ACTIONS:
On February 13, 2001, the Eagle City Council approved a preliminary plat application
for Castlebury Subdivision (PP-15-00).
On March 20, 2001, the Eagle Design Review Board approved a design review
application for the common area landscaping within Castlebury Subdivision (DR-12-01).
On August 14,2001, the Eagle City Council approved a final plat application for
Castlebury Subdivision (FP-17 -01).
COMPANION APPLICATIONS: None
E.
F.
ZONING DESIGNATION: R-l (Residential)
Page 1 of 5
K:\Planning DeptlEagle ApplicationslDrl2001IDR-71-01 sign drf.doc
G.
H.
SIGNAGE:
Two Monument Signs
Sign Data Proposed Required
Sign Dimensions 7' 6" high x 33' 6" wide 8' high (maximum)
Area of Signage 46.5-square feet (approx.) 50-square feet
Illumination Two 75-watt quartz "Stemor Infranor" ground Interior-illumination prohibited
mounted lights
Two 120-watt high pressure sodium
"Brandon" deck lights
Sign Landscaping 1,750-square feet 150-square feet (minimum)
AGENCY RESPONSES: None
1. LETIERS FROM THE PUBLIC: None received to date
STAFF ANALYSIS PROVIDED WITHIN THE STAFF REPORT:
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.
C.
.
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-8(K)(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 of the 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(C)(5)
Sign materials and overall appearance shall compliment with the building architecture
and colors as determined by the Design Review Board.
DISCUSSION:
.
The applicant is proposing to install two ground mounted 75-watt quartz lights at the base of
each of the monument signs. The applicant is encouraged to provide in-ground can lights to
illuminate the monument signs (see attached cut sheets within)(staff requests that a
Page 2 of 5
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle Applications\Dr\2001\DR-71-01 sign drfdoc
determination of the use of in ground can lights be made by the Design Review Board).
The applicant is proposing to install two historic lights on each end of the monument signs.
The lights are proposed to be 120-watt high pressure sodium which illuminate a yellow light.
The proposed ground mounted lights are quartz light which illuminate a white light. The
street lights within the subdivision are proposed to be 100-watt high pressure sodium. It is
staff s opinion that the ground mounted lights should be a high pressure sodium light to
remain consistent with other light proposed within the subdivision and the lights proposed on
top of each sign. If the Design Review Board approves the use of above ground light
fixtures, then the applicant should be required to provide a ground mounted light fixture that
utilizes a high pressure sodium light. The revised detail should be reviewed and approved by
staff prior to issuance of a sign permit.
Further, if above ground light fixtures are approved by the Design Review Board, then the
lights used to illuminate the monument signs should be screened or located so they do not
shine onto the roadway or onto any nearby property. The light fixtures should be concealed
or screened with perimeter landscaping providing a 12 month screen of sufficient height and
density to conceal such fixtures.
Staff defers comment regarding design and color of all proposed signs to the Design Review
Board.
.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION PROVIDED WITIDN THE REPORT:
Based upon the information provided to staff to date, staff recommends approval with the site
specific conditions of approval and the standard conditions of approval provided within the staff
report.
PUBLIC HEARING OF THE BOARD:
A. A public hearing on the application was held before the Design Review Board on November 15,
2001, at which time testimony was taken and the public hearing was closed. The Board made their
decision at that time.
B. Oral testimony in opposition to this proposal was presented to the Design Review Board by no one.
C. Oral testimony in favor of this proposal was presented to the Design Review Board by no one (not
including the applicant).
BOARD DECISION:
The Board voted 3 to 0 (Barnes and McCullough absent) to approve DR- 71-01 for a design
review application for two monument signs with the following staff recommended site specific
conditions of approval and standard conditions of approval with text shown with strike thru to be
deleted by the Board and text shown with underline to be added by the Board.
SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. The applieam shall be reql:lired to proviàe in gro1:lßd eaR. lights to illuminate the monl:lment sign (see
attacheà eut sheets '.vithin).
GR
If Aabove ground lightfixtures are approved by the Design Review Board~ then the fixtures useà to
illuminate the monl:lment sign shall be The applicant shall be required to provide screenin~ eè or
located the ~ound mounted fixtures 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.
Page 3 of 5
K:\Planning Dept\Eagle ApplicationslDr12001 \DR- 71-01 sign drf.doc
2. Provide a light fixture to illuminate the monument sign that utilizes a high pressure sodium light.
The revised detail shall be reviewed and approved by staff prior to issuance of a sign permit.
3. Interior illumination is not permitted for monument signs.
4. 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 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 change.
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.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. The application for this item was received by the City of Eagle on October 4, 2001.
2. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to property owners abutting the subject property in
accordance with Eagle City Code on October 19,2001.
3. The Board reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of this proposed design review
application (DR-71-01) with regard to Eagle City Code Section 8-2A-13 Design Review Board
Action, and based upon the information provided concludes that the proposed design review
application is in accordance with the Eagle City Code.
Page 4 of 5
K: \Planning DeptlEagle Applications\Drl200 I \DR- 71-0 I sign drf. doc
------------------ ----.------
DATED this 13th day of December 2001.
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
OF THE CITY OF EAGLE
Ada County, Idaho
ATTEST:
Page 5 of 5
KlPlanning DeptlEagle ApplicationslDrl200JIDR-71-0J sign drfdoc
-~- -.._-~--------
-~- ~------_._- - --