The URL can be used to link to this page

Findings - DR - 2002 - DR-43-02 - Construct 2 Monument Signs For Cottonwood Creek Subdivision At 2421 N Eagle Rd ORIGINAL BEFORE THE EAGLE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR ) A DESIGN REVIEW FOR TWO MONUMENT ) SIGNS FOR COTTONWOOD CREEK ) SUBDIVISION FOR COTTONWOOD CREEK LLC) FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW CASE NUMBER DR-43-02 The above-entitled design review application came before the Eagle Design Review Board for their action on August 8, 2002. 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. PROJECT SUMMARY: Cottonwood Creek LLC, represented by David Waldron, is requesting design review approval to construct two monument signs for Cottonwood Creek Subdivision. The site is located on the west side of Eagle Road approximately 1 50-feet north ofColchester Drive at 2421 North Eagle Road. B. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL: The City of Eagle received the application for this item on June 27, 2002. 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 July 19,2002. D. HISTORY OF RELEVANT PREVIOUS ACTIONS: On July 11, 2002, the Eagle Design Review Board approved six office buildings and common area landscaping within Cottonwood Creek Subdivision (DR-38-02). On April 9, 2002, the Eagle City Council approved a comprehensive plan amendment from Residential Two to Mixed Use and a rezone with development agreement from A-R to L-O-DA- P for this site. E. COMPANION APPLICATIONS: None F. ZONING DESIGNATION: L-O-DA-P (Limited Office with Development Agreement PUD) Page 1 of 4 K:IPlanning DeptlEagle ApplicationslDr\2002IDR-43-02 sign drf.doc G. SIGNAGE: Monument Sign Sign Data Proposed Required Sign Dimensions 8' high x 18' wide 8' high (maximum) Area of Signage 48-square feet (approx.) 50-square feet Illumination Two 100-watt high pressure sodium Interior-illumination prohibited ground mounted fixtures Sign Landscaping 600-square feet l44-square feet (minimum) H. AGENCY RESPONSES: None I. LETTERS FROM THE PUBLIC: None received to date STAFF ANALYSIS PROVIDED WITIDN THE STAFF REPORT: A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROVISIONS, WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL: (None) B. ZONING CODE PROVISIONS WHICH ARE OF SPECIAL CONCERN REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL: . 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 detennined by the Design Review Board. C. DISCUSSION: . Staff defers comment regarding design issues and color of the proposed sign to the Design Review Board. STAFF RECOMMENDATION PROVIDED WITIDN THE REPORT: Based upon the infonnation 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 Page 2 of 4 K:\Planning Dept\Eagle ApplicationslDrl2002IDR-43-02 sign drfdoc report. PUBLIC HEARING OF THE BOARD: A. A public hearing on the application was held before the Design Review Board on August 8, 2002, 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 4 to 0 (Murray, McCullough, and Barnes absent) to approve DR-43-02 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 underline to be added by the Board. SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The light fixtures 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. 2. Interior illumination is not permitted for monument signs. 3. A sign permit is required prior to a sign being constructed on this site. 4. The wound mounted lilht fixtures shall be 100-watt (maximum) hilh pressure sodium. 5. A maximum of two wound mounted li~ht fixtures shall be used at each si¡¡n. 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 Page 3 of 4 K:\Planning Dept\Eagle ApplicationslDr\2002IDR-43-O2 sign drf.doc 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. Any modification of the approved design review plans must be approved prior to construction/installation of such changes. Failure to do so may result in the requirement to modify the project to comply with the approved design review and/or result in the inability to issue a certificate of completion for this project. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: 1. The application for this item was received by the City of Eag1e on June 27, 2002. 2. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to property owners abutting the subject property in accordance with Eagle City Code on July 19,2002. 3. The Board reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of this proposed design review application (DR-43-02) with regard to the Eagle City Code Title 8, Chapter 2, Article A. DR Design Review Overlay District, and based upon the information provided with the conditions required herein, concludes that the proposed design review application is in accordance with the Eagle City Code and the Eagle Comprehensive Plan. DATED this 15th day of August 2002. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD OF THE CITY GLE Ada County, aho ATTEST: -' "........, " 'I#. ~.'~..1 OF B-4 "If] ,.." ~ ~ ........ O~ ~.. !Ii'.. ..~" I v... ..,yOR,.¡ ....'.. '\ .. . 0"" <'A.. :'ú V".. : : \*= : * \ _.- ~ : : ~... r r¡ AL r-::. : ~ .-1>~) L ~::: ~ .'^ .."0,,<).- 0 :: ,,*\1"').. ..'¡'Þ')R'-¡;;a. ~ .: ',"'~ "-....- ~.,..." "#;~ Ì'p OF l"}' ......" '" ~ "." """" ...,~., Page 4 of 4 K:lPlanning DeptlEagle Applications\Dr\2002IDR-43-02 sign drf.doc