HomeMy WebLinkAboutAUP_2019-05-09_AgendaPacket C ITY OF A TASCADERO
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
6500 PALMA AVE ▪ ATASCADERO, CA 93422 ▪ (805) 461 -5035 ▪ FAX 461-7612
Administrative Use Permit Hearing
A G E N D A
The City of Atascadero’s Zoning Hearing Officer will hold a public hearing
at 11:30 a.m. or later on Thursday, May 9, 2019 at City Hall, Room 106,
6500 Palma Ave., Atascadero, to consider the following projects:
1. 7770 MORRO ROAD, USE19-0039; The project is an application to allow an
additional monument sign. Staff recommendation is for the Hearing
Officer to approve the AUP with a condition that the existing monument
sign be removed before issuing building permits for a new sign, OR
deny the request and require the applicant to redesign the existing
monument sign to incorporate his sign. (Murton) (Mariah Gasch,
Assistant Planner)
PLEASE NOTE: Any court challenge to the actions taken at the public
hearing may be limited to considering only those issues raised at the public
hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence to the City of
Atascadero at, or prior to, the public hearing.
Any decision of the Hearing Officer is final unless a ppealed to the Planning
Commission within 14 days of the action. Any person aggrieved by the
decision may file an appeal. Appeal forms are available in the Community
Development Department or on the City’s website (www.atascadero.org).
The fee for filing an appeal is $762 and must accompany the appeal
documentation.
t:\~ administrative use permit\agendas\2019\may 9 2019.doc
C ITY OF A TASCADERO
COMMUNITY DEVELOP MENT
Administrative Hearing Agenda Report ITEM # 1
FROM: Mariah Gasch MEETING DATE: May 9, 2019
FILE NUMBER: USE 19-0039
PROJECT ADDRESS: 7770 Morro Road
SITUATION: The applicant, Dr. Ian Murton, is proposing one new monument sign on the
property with his office. The site has three existing signs including one existing multi-
tenant monument sign, one suspended sign and one tenant direct ional sign. The
proposed sign is 28 square feet, double-sided, and would be approximately six feet tall
including the posts that would support it. The sign face would be a light tan color with dark
lettering. The posts would be painted a dark brown color to match the building. The sign
that the applicant is requesting would be a second monument sign less than 200 feet
away from the existing monument sign on the same parcel. The applicant is requesting
the exception because he is concerned about the visibil ity of his office from Morro
Road/Highway 41.
EVALUATION: The site has an existing multi-tenant monument sign that is approximately
90-sqaure feet. This sign serves the building on the property behind Dr. Murton’s office.
Dr. Murton’s name is listed on this sign but he is not a tenant of the rear building. There
is an easement over the project site for this sign to be located here. However, staff cannot
locate permits for the existing monument sign. The existing suspended sign is
approximately 6 square feet and the tenant directional sign is 5 square feet. The tenant
directional sign is not included in the total aggregate sign area. Including the new sign,
the aggregate total would be approximately 120 square feet. Atascade ro Municipal Code
(AMC) 9-15.007 limits sign area for this zoning district to 150 square feet.
AMC 9-15.008 limits ground monument signs to one sign per 200 linear feet. The
applicant is requesting an exception to allow two monument signs to be less than a
quarter of the distance that the Municipal Code requires.
CalTrans will do frontage improvements in the future that will require the applicant to
reduce the size of the existing monument sign as it is currently within the right-of-way and
a new sidewalk will be constructed along the front of the property close to the existing
monument sign.
Staff is concerned that the addition of another large sign will clutter the site and add
confusion. Additionally, the new sign will set a precedent for multiple signs on one
property. The proposed sign may partially block the view of the existing monument sign
from drivers going north. Vice versa, the existing sign could potentially hide the new sign
from drivers going south.
Page 2
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Administrative Hearing Officer:
Deny the applicant’s request and require the applicant to redesign the existing
monument sign to incorporate his sign.
Approve the applicant’s proposed sign with a condition that the existing monument
sign be removed or relocated before issuing permits for a new sign.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
☒ Categorical Exemption CEQA – Guidelines Section 15311
☐ Statutory Exemption §§ 21000, et seq & ________________________
☐ No Project – Ministerial Project
Findings
AMC 9-15.011 requires the Hearing Officer to make the following 4 findings:
1. The need for such signing is based on the purposes set forth in Section 9 -15.002;
The proposed sign does not accomplish three of the required purposes. Section 9-15.002
(b) describes the purpose to “encourage the effective use of signs as a means of
communication in the City and reduce possible traffic and safety hazards from confusing
or distracting signs.” Section 9-15.002 (c) describes the purpose to “Implement quality
sign design standards that are consistent with the City’s General Plan, Zoning Ordinance
and Appearance Review Guidelines”. Finally, Section 9-15.002 (h) describes the purpose
to “Limit the size and number of signs to levels that reasonably allow for the identification
of a residential, public or commercial location and the nature of any such commercial
business.”
2. The opportunity to combine signs for more than one (1) use on a si ngle sign
structure has been considered;
The applicant has considered combining signs and does not believe it is the best option.
However, with upcoming changes that will be required with the Caltrans Project, staff
believes that there is an opportunity to combine signs to comply with appearance review
and the General Plan.
3. For freeway-oriented signs, the sign area and height are the minimum needed to
achieve adequate visibility along the freeway due to highway ramp locations and
grade differences; and
The proposed sign is not freeway oriented.
4. Conformance with all other applicable codes and ordinances of the City, including,
but not limited to, the Zoning Ordinance, General Plan and its several elements,
and the appearance review guidelines. (Ord. 604 § 2, 2016)
Page 3
Improving the appearance and character of Atascadero, including signage, is a
Framework Principle of the General Plan. General Plan Policy 1.3 states: “Enhance the
rural character and appearance of the City, including commercial corridors, gateways and
public facilities.” Staff does not see adding an additional sign as being consistent with this
policy. It does not appear to be en hancing the appearance of the site at one of the city’s
major gateways.
Conditions
1. Permits shall not be issued for a new sign unless the existing monument sign is
removed.
Code Requirements
1. AMC 9-15 (Sign Ordinance)
2. AMC 9-1.112 Administrative Use Permit
Action:
Approve
Approve as modified
Deny
Continue to : _______________ to allow _________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
Continue indefinitely to allow: __________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
___________________________________
Hearing Officer
Aerial Map
Attachment 1: Location Map
USE 19-0039
Existing sign
Proposed sign
Proposed Site Plan
Attachment 2: Site Plan
USE 19-0039
Existing sign
Proposed sign
Proposed Sign
Attachment 3: Proposed Sign
USE 19-0039
View looking south on Highway 41
View looking north on Highway 41
Attachment 4: Site Photos
USE 19-0039
View looking at the frontage
Attachment 4: Site Photos
USE 19-0039