03-27-2000 CC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Sysco Billboard Report March 27, 2000 Page 2 of 14 typical billboard construction and the fact that it would be aesthetically inconsistent with the billboards to be constructed on the adjacent Bridges Golf Course property. Because billboards are conditionally allowed as interim uses, the City does have the ability to impose reasonable design requirements with the granting of the permit. The Planning Commission stipulated that the “design of the proposed billboards shall be revised to be consistent with or aesthetically complementary to the billboards approved for the Bridges Golf Course.” Staff has requested that the applicant submit revised design sketches for the Council to consider. Siting Requirements: (1) Location: The two proposed signs would be located adjacent to and north of State Highway 10. The signs are to be set back five feet from said right of way and would be more than 300 feet from the nearest residentially zoned property. (2) Minimum Spacing: While the two proposed signs would maintain more than a 1000-foot separation from each other, the second sign on Sysco’s property would not achieve the minimum required spacing from the first sign proposed and approved on the adjacent Bridges Golf Course property. The Planning Commission stipulated that Sysco apply for a variance to resolve this inconsistency. (3) Maximum Sign Area: The proposed signs would have a surface area of 672 square feet per side, which is less than the maximum allowed 700 square feet per side. (4) Orientation of Sign Faces: The sign faces will be angled and oriented toward State Highway 10. The angle of the separation between sign faces would not exceed 35 degrees. (5) Maximum Sign Height: The signs would not exceed the 35-foot height restriction. (6) Obstruction. It is believed that the proposed billboards would not be obstructive in any manner to drivers on State Highway 10. Other than the minimum spacing requirement, this request meets all of the specific siting requirements as set forth by ordinance 644. In response to the spacing issue, DeLite, representing Sysco, has applied for a variance, which the Planning Commission will consider at its next meeting on April 5, 2000. Adverse Effects Criteria: Ordinance 644 requires that the requested interim use permit be reviewed in the context of the adverse effects criteria in Section 1125.01, Subdivision 1e of the City Code. These criteria, with applicable responses, are as follows: (1) Relationship to Municipal Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan, in either current or amended version, does not address the