Findings - DR - 2002 - DR-51-02 - Monument Sign For Tahoe Ridge Subdivision
ORIGINAL
BEFORE THE EAGLE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR A )
DESIGN REVIEW FOR A MONUMENT SIGN FOR )
TAHOE RIDGE SUBDIVISION FOR HERSCHEL HIATT)
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
CASE NUMBER DR-51-02
The above-entitled design review application came before the Eagle Design Review Board for their
action on September 12,2002. 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:
Herschel Hiatt, represented by Dan Perry, is requesting design review approval for a monument
sign at the entrance to Tahoe Ridge Subdivision. The site is located on the west side of
Ballantyne Road approximately Y2-mile north of Floating Feather Road.
B. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL:
The City of Eagle received the application for this item on July 31, 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 August 23, 2002.
D. HISTORY OF RELEVANT PREVIOUS ACTIONS:
On January 23, 2001, the Eagle City Council approved the final plat for Tahoe Ridge
Subdivision (FP-12-00).
On September 26, 2000, the Eagle City Council approved the common area landscaping within
Tahoe Ridge Subdivision (DR-49-00).
E. COMPANION APPLICA nONS: None
F. ZONING DESIGNATION: R-E (Residential-Estates - up to one dwelling unit per two acres)
Page 1 of 5
K:IPlanning DeptlEagle ApplicationsIDr\2002IDR-5] -02 sign drf.doc
G. SIGNAGE:
Sign Data Proposed Required
Sign Dimensions 7' high x 26' wide 8' high (maximum)
Area of Signage 28-square feet (approx.) 50-square feet (maximum)
Illumination Two 100-watt high pressure Interior-illumination prohibited
sodium ground mounted light
fixtures
Sign Landscaping 1,344-square feet (approx.) 84-square feet (minimum)
Monument Sign
H. AGENCY RESPONSES: None
I. LETTERS 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)
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-l GENERAL APPLICABILITY:
.
This chapter applies to all proposed development located within the DR design review
overlay district which shall include the entire city limits, and any land annexed into the city
after adoption of this ordinance, as set forth in section 8-2A-6 of this article. Such
development includes, but is not limited to, new commercial, industrial, institutional, office,
and multi-family residential projects, signs, common areas and subdivision si~a~e within
residential subdivisions, proposed conversions, exterior remodeling, exterior restoration,
enlargement, or expansion of existing buildings, signs or sites, and requires the submittal of
a design review application pursuant to this chapter and fee as prescribed from time to time
Page 2 of 5
K:IPlanning DeptlEagle ApplicationsIDr\2002IDR-5l-02 sigo drfdoc
by the city council.
C. DISCUSSION:
.
On September 26, 2000, the Eagle City Council approved the common area landscaping within
Tahoe Ridge Subdivision (DR-49-00). The approved landscape plan showed the location of a
monument sign, however no monument sign was reviewed or approved with the common area
landscape application. Subsequently, a monument sign was constructed without the approval of
the City on the north side of the entrance to this subdivision in the general location noted on the
approved landscape plan. Per Eagle City Code, the applicant is required to submit a design
review application for the construction of subdivision signage. The existing monument sign is
constructed of concrete block finished with cultured stone and stucco with concrete caps placed
across the top of the monument sign and on top of each column. A rusted metal plate (14' long
by 2' tall) mounted on the front of the monument sign provides contrast from the stucco
background color but also complements the color of the stucco, with stainless steel letters
mounted on the front of the plate. The height and size of this sign complies with Eagle City
Code sign criteria.
The applicant is proposing to retain the existing ground mounted lights located in front of the
sign. Additional landscaping is proposed to be installed at the base of the sign to screen the
ground mounted light fixtures from view. The applicant should be required to provide a scalable
elevation plan showing the ground mounted light fixtures in relation to the proposed landscaping
showing that the ground mounted light fixtures are screened from view. The elevation plan
should be reviewed and approved by staff prior to issuance of a sign permit.
The ground mounted lights used to illuminate the monument sign should be screened or located
so they do not shine onto the roadway or onto any nearby property. The light fixture 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 WITHIN 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 September 12,
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 Stanger absent) to approve DR-Sl-02 for a
design review application for a monument sign 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.
Page 3 of 5
K:IPlanning DeptlEagle ApplicationsIDr\2002IDR-51-02 sign drfdoc
SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. The grou~d mounted lights used to illuminate the monument sign shall be screened or located so they
do not shIne onto the roadway or onto any nearby property. The light fixture shall be concealed or
screened with perimeter landscaping providing a 12 month screen of sufficient height and density to
conceal such fixtures.
2. Provide a scalable elevation plan showing the ground mounted light fixtures in relation to the
proposed landscaping showing that the ground mounted light fixtures are screened from view. The
elevation plan shall be reviewed and approved by staff prior to this item being scheduled for review
by the City Council iss1:1aaøe of a sign permit.
3. All landscaping, with the exception of the annuals, shall be installed on or before November 1, 2002.
4. Interior illumination is not permitted for monument signs.
5. A sign permit shall be obtained within five days from City Council approval of this application.
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.
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 Eagle on July 31, 2002.
2. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to property owners abutting the subject property in
accordance with Eagle City Code on August 23, 2002.
Page 4 of 5
K:\Planning DeptlEagle ApplicationslDr\2002IDR-51-02 sign drf.doc
---~--
------------ - -- . -
3. The Board reviewed the particular facts and circumstances of this proposed design review
application (DR-51-02) 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 10th day of October 2002.
ATTEST:
""""""1
" "Ii
~l'" Of BAO¿l/ """
.:> ~..~ \,
.:> ~.. oRAl' \ ~
=/)I ~1 q..."
: :0 ~~
: : {j .ø -: :
. . ." '(. "". .
¡ .. \ ~ ~¡.;~: 0 ::
-- ..~- S P At¡I.. -..... ::
# .'Y~ '\ :" ....,-::
-- ...ORPOV-t-... ~::
### d"')., -...... ,<:) .."'~
### "Æ TE O~ ...."
##, ""
"""..Ii'"
1Â (~ Q ,Z f¥'V\ ~
-Sharon K. Moore, Eagle City CleM<:
Page 5 of 5
K:\Planning DeptlEagle ApplicationslDr\2002IDR-51-02 sign drf.doc